Yes.

care to elaborate? I think its a double edged sword and agree with deatharrow

I can write a computer program the spews all manner of profane things. If I were to release a product that does that I’m sure it would be much criticized and ultimately unsuccessful. Yet this doesn’t mean we should cripple the programming language to prevent this. Models are much more akin to programming languages than they are to products. If they are used to make products that do things people don’t like then people will not use those products.

you are comparing ai to programming language but programming language if uncensored doesn't have the ability to wreck humanity but uncensored ai sure does.

I would actually be curious if someone uses it for uncensoring because I am gonna be curious about how different would it be to the original model

But aside from that curiosity , this idea can increase no of cyber criminals , drug suppliers and a hell lot more

> wreck humanity but uncensored ai sure does

Care to elaborate how uncensored AI would "wreck humanity"? You seem convinced, since you use the word "sure", so I'd like to hear your reasoning.

I do think we only want the non-lobotomized ones.

See the large body of comments re: getting worse quality results from hosted LLM services as time passes. This is, at least in part, a result of censoring larger and larger volumes of knowledge.

One clinical example of this happening is Gemini refusing to help with C++ because it's an unsafe language: https://www.reddit.com/r/LocalLLaMA/comments/1b75vq0/gemini_...

I strongly believe that LLMs crippled in this way will eventually find themselves in trash, where they rightfully belong.

Totally agree. And that's why x.ai are building Grok.

LLMs don't speak. Why does it matter at all what text a computer program produces?