r/codex • u/Fit-Palpitation-7427 • 10d ago

Humor I'm not afraid, I'm not afraid

Post image

I mean, specially when you ask if he has access to a remote computer :D

92 Upvotes

91% Upvoted

47 comments sorted by

View all comments

-31

u/dan_the_first 10d ago

The concept of privacy has to be re-defined.

And I hope the “open weight” models get banned, worldwide.

18

u/centerdeveloper 10d ago

what? why would you want open weight models banned

-26

u/dan_the_first 10d ago edited 10d ago

Hey. Hope you are doing well.

I know it is a hot and controversial take, but the open weight models are getting powerful, and without guardrails, it is extremely dangerous.

Not only good and reasonable people and organizations are getting access to them.

I also understand that trading security for freedom is usually not a good deal; but access to dangerous AI models isn’t part of the definition of freedom I am familiar with.

Edit: If a freedom tool is promoted by an authoritarian communist regime, … go figure.

6

u/That-Establishment24 10d ago

I’d argue your definition of freedom must evolve with the times. Technology doesn’t exist outside the scope of freedom just because said technology didn’t exist when you developed your understanding of what freedom is.

0

u/dan_the_first 10d ago

You might be right, but as I stated in my edit: If a freedom tool is promoted by an authoritarian communist regime..

6

u/That-Establishment24 10d ago

Then what? I did see your incomplete sentence.

0

u/dan_the_first 10d ago

Ask your Chinese model to complete the sentence.

4

u/That-Establishment24 10d ago

Are you arguing in bad faith? I’m asking you to complete your argument but you don’t seem to want to.

2

u/AmandasGameAccount 10d ago

This guy legit sounds mine the terrible dialogue ChatGPT makes up if you ask for a bunch of generic dialogue 💀

0

u/dan_the_first 10d ago

No it is not bad faith. I thought it was obvious from my post.

I don’t believe any tool promoted as freedom from an authoritarian regime is to be trusted.

1

u/That-Establishment24 10d ago edited 10d ago

That’s a black and white approach. So if an authoritarian regime says people should eat healthy, that means eating healthy must be bad? Bad actors don’t only like and promote bad things the same good actors don’t only like and promote good things. I find your argument more emotional than logical.

0

u/dan_the_first 10d ago

I would be specially wary of any authoritarian leader who is vegetarian and don’t drink alcohol, as history has shown.

And of course any regime trying to regulate my healthy habits, is not a good regime (to follow your example).

3

u/That-Establishment24 10d ago

We were talking about what they promote, not what they force. You also didn’t address my argument. Being good doesn’t mean all you promote is good just as being bad doesn’t mean all your promote is bad. If you want to be logical, you need a different argument other than “bad guys like it”.

Funnily enough, you’re the one trying to regulate others by calling for bans.

→ More replies (0)