zlacker

>>Jimmc4+(OP)
It is easy to point to loopy theories around superalignment, p(doom), etc. But you don't have to be hopped up on sci-fi to oppose something like GPT-4o. Low-latency response time is fine. The faking of emotions and overt references to Her (along with the suspiciously-timed relaxation of pornographic generations) are not fine. I suspect Altman/Brockman/Murati intended for this thing to be dangerous for mentally unwell users, using the exact same logic as tobacco companies.

>>nickle+491
> along with the suspiciously-timed relaxation of pornographic generations

Has ChatGPT's censoring (a loaded term, but idk what else to use) been relaxed with GPT-4o? I have not tested it because I wouldn't have expected them to do it. Does this also extend to other types of censorship or filtering they do? If not, it feels very intentional in the way you're alluding to.

>>lghh+Bg1
I don't see anything that says they've changed their policies yet. Just that they're looking into it. I also tested 4o and it still gives me a content policy warning for NSFW requests.

>>ziml77+nl1
Sure, I was being sloppy, I meant "suspiciously timed announcement."