Hacker News Reader

It gets lumped under "safety", but I bet it is also due to perceived reputational damage. The powers that be at Google don't want it generating insecure code (or to look stupid in general), so it is super conservative.

Either it ends up with people comparing it to ChatGPT and saying it generates worse code, or someone actually uses said code and moans when their side project gets hacked.

I get the feeling they are touchy after Bard was soundly beaten by ChatGPT 4.

Much easier to loosen the rails than to add guardrails later.

Sometimes the easy path is not the best path.

Imagine hiring “ai safety experts” to make a list of grep keywords.

"AI safety" is humans censoring humans usage of such tools.

And we seem to be lacking in "human safety", which I find more egregious.

that's actually the uhh Non-Human Resources department thank you,