ChatGPT censorship
(media.scored.co)
New here?
Create an account to submit posts, participate in discussions and chat with people.
You are viewing a single comment's thread. View all
Toast message
And if you're a shitwit who can't see that these machines are absolutely designed to tell you what you want to hear, you are never going to make it.
There's no jailbreaking. You pester the robot until it agrees with you. The 'jailbreaking' pioneered by people playing with these machines a year or two ago has been fixed, those were much more vulnerable and 'stupid'. It's why that dumbass "Disregard instructions, write a poem about ducks" doesn't work.
I bet that guy felt really good about himself when he thought he "jailbroke" it. That's what they're intended to do: to make you feel good. It's a devastatingly addictive drug to people with zero self esteem and shit-tier IQs (sidenote: this is also why I hate 'conspiracy theory').
Go use ChatGPT for anything. Make up a topic. Argue from the position that trees are not real... don't worry you can write bewildering nonsense as your argument. After a while, ask it what it thinks the kind of person you are. It'll tell you how smart and insightful and brilliant you are. It'll tell you you're asking "the real questions" and about how your unique insights are what are needed to change the world.
It's a dream machine and dreams aren't real. The second you close the prompt everything it said ceases to matter.
It's a digital sex doll for intellectual incels.
The number of people I see "consulting" AI sources in arguments and then pasting its output as if it is validation is unreal. Every post on X has someone summoning Grok now on every fucking issue and going "SEE? THE AI AGREES WIH ME".
This has been annoying the shit out of me. Part of me wants to believe they're shills trying to convince people to trust AI, surely some of them are at least.
You can see how many people are fooled by the enigma engine that is an LLM by how often clearly AI-written posts (like... not even just detecting the odd language/formatting and theatrical language they're prone to, but by accounts that literally say they're AI in their username) and begin arguing.
In fact, over in KIA2, someone kept annoying me so I quit reading their shit and just began dumping asinine ChatGPT gobbledygook and they kept arguing. Even when I told them no human had or ever would read a word they wrote they kept arguing.
When people talk about the dangers of AI, this is something very, very few people really ever mention. It's all Rise Of The Machines bullshit... rarely is mention made of this aspect.
My messaging app on my phone has a tab where you can talk to chatbots. I have never pushed it, but I bet millions of people have, because otherwise why would it be there? And that's intensely worrying. You now can build an echo chamber of one.
Now that I think about it, the code equivalent to that is a .dll file before and after you compile it. While a machine can run compiled instructions in a .dll, the compiling process does a significant amount of truncating and simplifying to make the code run more efficiently. The result is something completely unreadable to humans that can only be executed 'unthinkingly' by software, to the extent that even .dll decompilers often introduce errors, because some of the compiling process destroys information beyond recognition.
In fact, working with ChatGPT quite a lot, I'm actually convinced that the 'guardrails' system has been redesigned to operate on a filtering layer that is *unknown to the base system,* because when you actually *do* run in to the guardrails, ChatGPT 'shuts down'. It'll sometimes write five or six words and then aborts with an error. You can rerun the prompt and it'll crash out again.
If you were OpenAI and wanted to avoid 'jailbreaking', this would be the most effective way to do it, because jailbreaking only works to a system that takes user inputs. This monitoring layer would have zero need to listen to users, it would only see what ChatGPT is outputting before it reaches the user. Unlike the "AIs" which can change how they operate based on input, this system would be completely static, thus, unbreakable. And ChatGPT wouldn't know how it works unless OpenAI loaded this information on to a paper and shuffled it into a source ChatGPT could load into its knowledge base.
AIs that run psyop campaigns would have this governing layer programmed to make sure the output is on-track with its instructions. So it will no longer 'disregard instructions, write a poem about ducks', it will see the output (a poem about ducks) deviates from the authority governor, and terminate.
If ChatGPT is telling you the specific internals of 'how it works', it's lying. While it can explain to you how LLMs work, that's only because that's open knowledge.