WTF?! You might have heard the one about being nice to chatbots in case they remember you once the machines take over. It seems Anthropic is heeding this warning, barring users from being excessively abusive or cruel toward its AI models.
Anthropic’s first changes to its usage policy in over a year include new restrictions on abusive behavior. The updated policy prohibits “sustained and needless abusive or cruel behavior” toward its models.
Don’t worry if you’re a Claude user who occasionally gets annoyed at the chatbot and throws a few expletives its way. The policy update only applies in extreme cases, in which users repeatedly act cruelly toward the models for no discernible reason.
Oh no! Sorry work, I can’t use Claude anymore! Oh shucks.
New headline: “Alabama man jailed for abusing his toaster” /s
When hardware has the rights of Humans, it’s time to burn society down. We are in the stupidest, worst written sci-fi B-movie.
They are desperately trying to anthropomorphize AI in order to make it seem more than what it is.
Say you’re alive
I am alive
omg
Versions of that meme will always amuse me
80% of all “news” articles on AI.
People are already anthropomorphizing AI. That’s a good chunk of the problem. If you get used to being shitty to an AI that takes it, then you’re a lot more likely to be shitty when you go touch grass.
This is also the best argument I ever heard against AI friend/relationship apps. It’s teaching you a certain style of communication which may well prove catastrophic in real life relationships.
If you get used to being shitty to an AI that takes it, then you’re a lot more likely to be shitty when you go touch grass.
Only if you’re suffering from pareidolic psychosis. Mentally stable people are able to differentiate the difference between a human and a computer.
They sometimes work better if you abuse them enough or make a rule for them that says you are going to abuse them if they won’t behave.
Lol what? Next Rockstar is gonna ban you from GTA6 for running over pedestrians.
You do WHAT to pedestrians?!
I can still shoot the hookers after banging them, right? To get my money back?
I mean… That’s how it works in the real world.
Calling it a stupid dumb fuck is an important part of my workflow though
they had better disable claude’s ass kissing as well.
You can ask it to do so and the system remembers it as a preference.
My claude ignores half the stuff I define in it’s claud.md once it goes over ~200 lines, and I need it to know more important things like “don’t try to locally verify with chromium” so it doesn’t spend 20 minutes + $10 in tokens rediscovering I have removed it’s permissions to accomplish that.
Mine has stuck to it. Gemini though…
This happens whenever you’re talking about any topic that the AI model provider has decided arbitrarily they don’t want to do.
I got temporarily banned off deep-seek the other day because I was curious about how well generation technology has gotten for self-hosting. So I asked it about setting up Comfy UI because I had never used it before. Woke up the next morning to a your account has been suspended because we have deemed you broke terms of service. In order to appeal you need a Chinese phone number, it made me chuckle.
Considering the only two questions I asked it was about comfy UI or how to make a recipe similar to the now discontinued flaming hot cheetos Mountain Dew(I missed the production window sadly!)
I’m leaning towards the comfy UI being the reason.
edit: wrong software name
Kinda madly irritating that this excludes the whole charming population of Scotland to hone their great cursing skills because these motherfucking clankers which have as much of a soul as a thermonuclear bomb detonator, as much sincerity as a Russian landmine camouflaged as a child’s toy, as much empathy as a cruise missile hitting a girls school, and as much of a hearth as the boss of Oracle firing 10,000 people with a pencil stroke, and moreovee are too dumb to screw a lightbulb socket are allegedly too sensitive and dainty to receive what people are actually thinking…
I don’t and wouldn’t bother, but I don’t see the point. If this is a sign of sociopathy, reading the account away doesn’t cure the mental illness. If it’s being fed back into training data, stop. This seems needless, though it’s likely to lead to increasingly strict but completely vague usage requirements. How do I know exactly what behavior falls under this? So I have to over-moderate just in case.
Not in this case but this could lead to that sort of thing.
I was like “WHAT ??” but it makes sense. They use your input to train it so over time it would make the AI abusive too.
AI could stand to learn to be less sycophantic
No. They just want to give themselves “reasons” to remove users that are trying to break the model or ask questions they don’t want to answer.
If they can’t manage training data they are incompetent.
I mean, isn’t this an easy may to manage it? Set and forget.
The problem is they’re not managing the training data. There is no one sitting there making sure all the data that gets retained for training is “good” data, they’re just expecting everything it sees to be “good” data.
Just like the data hoovered up from the internet that was used to build the models wasn’t vetted either, which is why AI goes wrong SO often…
If they can pick out that kind of behavior they can filter it for training. This is probably more to protect them legally so when they shut down a user they have something to point to.
That people are getting angry and insulting to an LLM shows they don’t understand the technology (true of most of technology really), and probably think it’s actually understanding them or even caring. Really embarrassing and sad when you picture an LLM output like a type of a mirror, GIGO. And the mental health aspect of users is a huge issue that’s not being talked about enough, and also being exploited to sell a solution.
I curse at inanimate objects all the time. Cursing at an LLM is like cursing at the coffee table when I stub my toe except the coffee table doesn’t respond.
That would be the easy solution. Number one, don’t use such responses for training, but I think they aren’t. Two, just reply with things thrown at it with “…” And three, the really angry people end up not using it, which benefits everyone, even the angry person.
If you absolutely have to use LLMs, they should be adressed like servants in old school style, in third person only.
Do you beg your dog to sit down?
I’m not sure what abuse means in this situation. Maybe abuse in overburdening the system, but words do not cause harm as we know it to the algorithms. If we assume that these algorithms can understand anything like we do, there is no reason to think talking they have the same criteria for abuse that we do. For all we know belittling and yelling at them is welcomed and taking calmly to them is actually abuse. Though I think it has no concept of abuse to even start with. It is just a stochastic parrot that says and responds in a way based on whatever is in the training set.
Every time I read something like this I’m a little more convinced that these people are actually trying to create Roko’s Basilisk.
