People are generally complaining about false positives. Now if you really wanna know what a real criminal organization would do... They'd just buy data center hardware even if it costs 200k because a successful targeted hit could yield far in excess of that. So yes it's speed bump at best.

They should have designed a guardrail that doesn't make a probabilistic system less reliable. That's hard though. I'm afraid the only way to prevent accessing certain knowledge in a model is not to train it on those materials that enable them.

If we learned anything in the past years of LLM-s is that these guardrails will be jailbroken in no time. I've had some fun time too circumventing them.

Anyone cares about a fable about my grandmother's dream she had in morse code about an alien species signaling her a DNA sequence?

It's entirely reasonable for them to be really annoying to legitimate users while still being useless at their intended purpose. Just look at DRM.

Murder is very (100%!) effective at preventing cancer. And yet, it is a useless method of preventing cancer.

The complain because they get wrongfully triggered

> if you ask it to write secure code, it assumes it is cybersecurity related work instead of software engineering best practices, and you get downgraded.

Will code created this way more or less secure?

And I bet malware developers will find ways to circumvent them.

It’s like those "you wouldn’t steal a car" anti piracy ads that DVD buyers were forced to watch while users of the pirated version could simply watch the film without such useless annoyance