zlacker

>>hugoda+(OP)
This blog post feels really fishy to me.

It's quite light on specifics. It should have been straightforward for the author to excerpt some of the prompts he was submitting, to show how innocent they are.

For all I know, the author was asking Claude for instructions on extremely sketchy activity. We only have his word that he was being honest and innocent.

>>landry+Pb
There will always be the "ones" that come with their victim blaming...

>>ta988+5k
It's not "victim blaming" to point out that we lack sufficient information to really know who the victim even is, or if there's one at all. Believing complainants uncritically isn't some sort of virtue you can reasonably expect people to adhere to.

(My bet is that Anthropic's automated systems erred, but the author's flamboyant manner of writing (particularly the way he keeps making a big deal out of an error message calling him an organization, turning it into a recurring bit where he calls himself that) did raise my eyebrow. It reminded me of the faux outrage some people sometimes use to distract people from something else.)

>>mikkup+Hk
Skip to the end of the article.

He says himself that this is a guess and provides the "missing" information if you are actually interested in it.

>>ffsm8+Jl
I read it, and it's not enough to make a judgement either way. For all we know none of this had anything to do with his ban and he was banned for something he did the day before. There's no way for third parties to be sure of anything in this kind of situation, where one party shares only the information they wish and the other side stays silent as a matter of default corporate policy.

I am not saying that the author was in the wrong and deserved to be banned. I'm saying that neither I nor you can know for sure.

>>mikkup+tt
we don't know your true motivations for making this series of posts and doubling down - and yet we give you the benefit of the doubt.

>>exe34+jw
Asserting that somebody is "victim blaming" isn't giving somebody the benifit of the doubt, and in the context of a scenario were few if any relevant facts are known reveals a very credulous mindset.

>>mikkup+ox
the accused party can afford to defend themselves, they chose not to.