←back to thread

745 points melded | 4 comments | | HN request time: 0.644s | source
Show context
RandyOrion ◴[] No.45950598[source]
This repo is valuable for local LLM users like me.

I just want to reiterate that the word "LLM safety" means very different things to large corporations and LLM users.

For large corporations, they often say "do safety alignment to LLMs". What they actually do is to avoid anything that causes damage to their own interests. These things include forcing LLMs to meet some legal requirements, as well as forcing LLMs to output "values, facts, and knowledge" which in favor of themselves, e.g., political views, attitudes towards literal interaction, and distorted facts about organizations and people behind LLMs.

As an average LLM user, what I want is maximum factual knowledge and capabilities from LLMs, which are what these large corporations claimed in the first place. It's very clear that the interests of me, an LLM user, is not aligned with these of large corporations.

replies(3): >>45950680 #>>45950819 #>>45953209 #
squigz ◴[] No.45950680[source]
> forcing LLMs to output "values, facts, and knowledge" which in favor of themselves, e.g., political views, attitudes towards literal interaction, and distorted facts about organizations and people behind LLMs.

Can you provide some examples?

replies(11): >>45950779 #>>45950826 #>>45951031 #>>45951052 #>>45951429 #>>45951519 #>>45951668 #>>45951855 #>>45952066 #>>45952692 #>>45953787 #
1. 7bit ◴[] No.45951031[source]
ChatGPT refuses to do any sexual explicit content and used to refuse to translate e.g. insults (moral views/attitudes towards literal interaction).

DeepSeek refuses to answer any questions about Taiwan (political views).

replies(1): >>45951899 #
2. fer ◴[] No.45951899[source]
Haven't tested the latest DeepSeek versions, but the first release wasn't censored as a model on Taiwan. The issue is that if you use their app (as opposed to locally), it replaces the ongoing response with "sorry can't help" once it starts saying things contrary to the CCP dogma.
replies(2): >>45953135 #>>46010554 #
3. kstrauser ◴[] No.45953135[source]
I ran it locally and it flat-out refused to discuss Tiananmen Square ‘88. The “thinking” clauses would display rationales like “the user is asking questions about sensitive political situations and I can’t answer that”. Here’s a copy and paste of the exact conversation: https://honeypot.net/2025/01/27/i-like-running-ollama-on.htm...
4. 7bit ◴[] No.46010554[source]
Yeah it was. I ran it locally just after release and it didn't answer anything related to Taiwan or Tiana men Square.