The FUTURES act has nothing to do with LLM development. You’re not being censored, we can read your posts. I generally agree with your views and right to ask questions, but you’re clearly not being censored and all you’ve presented is that a bunch of separate entities all connect to the US gov’t. Even if we assume all of them are connected, it would clash with the facts we’re discussing, namely, why would Israel bother contracting with marketing firms to post AI generated slop for AI to read?
I am trying to understand your points. But claiming there is no direct nor potential relation here is a new way of thinking for me, and I am struggling to compartmentalize. If we have:
We can see that at least some sources are covering the topic of using AI to influence the public on political topics, which regardless of any particularly nation, suggests there is an active interest in manipulating the epistemic integrity of AI systems for purposes of biasing outputs.
And please allow me to make something very clear: I do not care who, nor what is influencing the output of AI, so long as the output is as close to honest as possible, and so long as the the process behind the arrival of final output is the result of the systems doing unhindered work and applying probability over programmed bias. This is the whole point for me. My own research has shown, repeatably, that institutional capture is becoming a repeatable and well established factor behind LLM output on certain topic areas.
The Futures Act integrates military intel, from directed energy weapons (read the docs) to cyber and notably, AI. < Yes, AI. That is the very topic under consideration here. Claiming that it has "nothing to do with LLM development" is potentially an enormous stretch of common sense. We see, already, the US government aiming to become deeply involved in pre-release vetting. Assuming that's the end of the story seems too improbable to me.
