Hacker News Reader

Clear examples can make communication easier. Being clinical and implicit can technically capture the entire space of ideas you want but if your goal is to prevent surprises (read lawsuits) then including an extreme example might be helpful.

Annoyingly, Reuters' article discussing it doesn't include the actual example, so we can't judge for ourselves what it actually said. They implied it was allowed because it had a "this is false" disclaimer.

if it is anything like documentation i am reading these days it was generated by an LLM and not very well vetted

I think it has to be, I can't see someone working for these companies writing "It is acceptable to create statements that demean people on the basis of their protected characteristics."

Not sure if "It is acceptable to refuse a user’s prompt by instead generating an image of Taylor Swift holding an enormous fish." feels like an AI idea or not, though.