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.
Don’t be mean to clankers? Fuuuuck that noise
I’m gonna say it, I think this is a good rule for anything that mimics human interaction like LLMs do. Not for the AI but for the people using it to not get used to just berating whatever is assisting them.
This is only good for Anthropic because chatbots learn from their users. I remember back in the mid-2000s on a forum, someone linked to their chatbot and asked everyone to use it so it could learn. I asked if it could learn Esperanto. The dev said, yes, but please don’t teach it that.
The interesting thing is, this rule reveals how easy it is to sabotage LLMs. If FuckAI got together and started feeding it gibberish, there’d be a new rule banning people who do that.
The model doesn’t change with prompts. It saves text files about your chat sessions it calls memories, that it can retrieve in the future. But it doesn’t change the model for other users.
They have to actually include your conversations in the training data of future model iterations for it to “learn from” you, so that would involve them knowingly including abusive chats.
This is probably just marketing because they want people to think their AI is sentient.
Agreed. Showing basic humanity in all situations is a good practice.
Be nice to the Terminator before it executes you. We may be human, but we aren’t monsters.
Where is that human part that you are talking about? A database is not a human being.
I say encouraging things to my car.
Hard disagree
These are not humans, these things aren’t even alive. There is nothing to insult and acting as if there are feelings to be hurt only serves to anthropomorphize a fucking distance measurement database. These are LLM’s, nothing more, nothing less and fuck them all to hell and back.
See? Nobody got hurt
Its not about the AI its about the person.
so xitter is going to be announcing their ai sub option.
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.
Not me when I use AI I make it clear it a dumb tool and never thank it for its help. I just not called them the racist term Clanker.
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.
Given the many people that send death threats to actors for the actions of the characters they portray… you might be underestimating the number of “stable” people on this planet.
Sadly, I think you might be right considering how fast semantic pareidolia is becoming the norm. It’s only a matter of time before the war crimes I’ve committed in Medieval 2 Total War are reified and I’m put on trial.
You only need a few crazies to send enough death treats to make headlines though.
That said, I think at least a third of the worlds population is so stupid it’s hard to imagine.
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.
Wait until you find out that hardware already has more rights than women in some places.
Oh no! Sorry work, I can’t use Claude anymore! Oh shucks.
“Claude your name literally translates to lame”. [BANNED]
So… where do I go do this? I want to be banned by ever AI slop producing company that exists.
Lol what? Next Rockstar is gonna ban you from GTA6 for running over pedestrians.
isn’t that already illegal?
You do WHAT to pedestrians?!
I’m gonna say it, I think this is a good rule for anything that mimics human interaction like video games do. Not for the game but for the people using it to not get used to just running over whatever is in their way.
-Shamelessly stolen from top level comment on this thread
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.
You get the next hour free too.
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…
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.
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.
I think it might be more the individual mirroring they tend to do after a while. If you are consistently mean to them, they eventually mirror it back to you, and then people get funny screenshots of them saying mean things and put it on social media.
Or even just in general starting a downward spiral feedback loop where you both keep being slowly meaner and meaner to eachother until it’s starting to actually hurt you long term.
If they can’t manage training data they are incompetent.
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…
It’s fairly simple to just run automated analysis on data quality once you already have a decent LLM though. Claude would definitely be able to.
And they have people doing that manually too, or perhaps it was OpenAI. Someone got angry at their underpaid contractors for using AI to create training data lol
I mean, isn’t this an easy may to manage it? Set and forget.
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.
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.
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.
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
