Jonny

In a democracy, it’s absolutely ok to define who can use the things you make and how. But it’s also absolutely ok for the Government to lose trust in you, tell you to fuck off and find an alternative. It’s also absolutely ok for you to nuke your own company in the process. The timing of this is not good for Anthropic and could be a potential boon to every other model that is exceeding expectations in their upcoming version (Grok, OAI, Gemini). More generally, I don’t see how this isn’t a slippery slope. What if a model maker updates their ToS that would block a use case that is legal but subjective? Agreeable in some states but not in others? What about in different countries with different governance or religions? It’s a huge can of worms. How can a government or company rely on a model that could have an ever-changing definition of what’s allowed without taking on major business/governance risk? They won’t. My hunch is that the company that embraces the “no holds barred” ToS will win because it’s the least risky to adopt wrt long term risk of getting rug-pulled.

> Sounds a lil bit anti-islam but hey Fuck statements like this. Similarly, fuck claiming that standing up for Gazans', West Bankers, Lebanese, Syrian people's right to live in peace and not get encroaching settlements, constant drone strikes and bombs is antisemitic. And fuck claiming that standing up for Ukrainian people's right to live in peace and not be invaded is Russophobic. And fuck not even noticing the needless and extreme manmade suffering in Sudan, Myanmar, North Korea and elsewhere. And fuck the possibility that in the future statements like this will have to include a line for Greenland. We stand for human dignity. That is the bottom line. You can disagree on details of individual situations and what specific actions hurt or help, but the bottom line in resolving such issues must be a common agreement that the underlying goal is to protect the dignity of all people. This is more important than political teams. There are also people who are on the same political team as you, but whose words and actions clearly demonstrate that they are not interested in human dignity - genuine *phobes who use appeals to freedom and life opportunistically. This must also be opposed. Again, the north star is human dignity. To be ultimately more interested not in pushing the people you oppose down, but in lifting the people you feel sympathy for up. If you observe the long-term pattern of how someone acts, you can tell.

Miss Devconnect already? Same 🥹 Here’s the Ethereum World's Fair recap video 🎞️ One week, 14k+ people, 500+ events, and thousands of different experiences. Full blog with numbers + highlights below.