Comment by KoolKat23 | Hacker News Reader

Comment by KoolKat23 | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Again words in my mouth. I'm not justifying that and nowhere does it say that. I could be very impolite to you right now trying to slander me like that.

I said I don't understand the fuss because there are guardrails, action taken and technical limitations.

THAT is my motive. The end of story. I do not need to parrot outrage because everyone else is, "you're either with us or against us" bullshit. I'm here for a rational discussion.

Again read what I've said. Technical limitations. You wrote that long ass explanation interspersed with ambiguities like consulting lawyers in borderline cases and then you expect an LLM to handle this.

Yes ML classification is good now but not foolproof. Hence we go back to the first point, processes to deal with this when x's existing guardrails fail, as x.com has done, delete, suspend, report.

My fear (only because you mention it, I didn't mention it above, I only said I don't get the fuss above) it seems should be that people are losing touch in this grok thing, their arguments are no longer grounded in truth or rational thought, almost a rabid witch hunt.

At no point did I say or imply LLMs are meant to make legal decisions.

"Hey grok make a sexy version of [obvious minor]" is not something that is hard to stop. try doing that query with meta, gemini, or sora, they manage it reliably well.

There are not technical impediments to stopping this, its a choice.

My point is saying if it's so complex you have to get a lawyer involved, how do you expect your LLM&system to cover all its own shortcomings.

I'd bet if you put that prompt into grok it'd be blocked judging by that Reddit link you sent. These folks are jailbreaking nearly asking to modify using neutral terms like clothing and images that grok doesn't have the skill to judge.

> My point is saying if it's so complex you have to get a lawyer involved, how do you expect your LLM&system to cover all its own shortcomings.

Every feature is lawyered up. Thats what general counsel does. Every feature I worked on at a FAANG had some level of legal compliance gate on it, because mistakes are costly.

For the team that launched the chatbots, loads of time went into figuring out what stupid shit users could make it do, and blocking it. Its not like all of that effort stopped. When people started finding new ways to do naughty stuff, that had to be blocked as well. Because other wise the whole feature had to be pulled to stop advertisers from fleeing, or worse FCC/class action.

> These folks are jailbreaking nearly asking to modify using neutral terms like clothing

CORRECT! people are putting effort into jailbreaking the app. where as on x grok they don't need to do any of that. Which is my point, its a product choice.

None of this is "hard legal problems" or in fact unpredictable. They are/have done a ton of work to stop that (again mainly because they want people to pay for "spicy mode")

I still feel it's a little bit hyperbolic and slightly over-reactive, but I see your point.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com