@AnthropicAI "I don't want to ban open weights" , proceeds to propose a regulatory system where the only companies that can legally compete are the ones already selling closed models. Including his.
@gnukeith The difference is chatgpt sees utilman.exe and thinks "crime." kimi sees it and thinks "recovery." One is trained on corporate liability, the other on actually helping you use your own machine. This is why the US is losing the AI race, we chose safety theater over usefulness.
@UnderSecE “Lying, cheating, and stealing is not innovation,” says the AI company that trained on copyrighted books and settled for $1.5B when authors noticed.
Get off the high horse. The horse was probably scraped too.
@mkratsios47 Oh the irony!. They call it “U.S. technology” but that technology was built on others’ books, code, writing, and art.
Maybe distillation is different legally, sure. But morally, the AI industry borrowed from the whole internet, then got mad when someone borrowed from them.
@levelsio AI is like 3D printing for digital work. It makes the first version easy. But owning a 3D printer doesn’t make you a great engineer, and using AI doesn’t make you original. The hard part is still taste, judgment, and knowing what’s worth making.
@GarryPNolan Anthropic knows best. They even knew you were going to complain, so the safety system bravely stopped your research and inspired this post. Please proceed to the approved, less useful model like a good citizen.
Christian Zionism does the same thing now. A political project about Israel, wrapped in prophecy and end times. Not policy anymore. God's plan.
Same move every time. Make it sound like God's will and people stop asking questions.
Churchill, 1920. He's making a cold political argument about Russia. But look at the words: soul, providence, good vs evil. He turns a policy into a holy war.
You believe the Church got the table of contents right but had no authority to. Inspired enough to identify God's word, not inspired enough to be trusted on anything else. Pick one.
So when someone calls dispensationalism biblical, or what Christians have always believed, they have it backwards. The early church didn't teach it. The Reformers didn't teach it. It's a 19th century invention that now drives foreign policy.
Christian Zionism gets called "historic Protestantism," but it was invented in the 1830s by John Nelson Darby and spread through the Scofield Reference Bible.
Westminster teaches one covenant of grace. Calvin teaches one people of God. The Church isn't a backup plan God ran while Israel waited. Israel is fulfilled in Christ, who makes Jew and Gentile into one body.
For 1,800 years nobody saw it. Scofield buried his system in the footnotes of a study Bible, and two generations later people can't tell his notes from the text. The irony is that the Reformers they claim disagree flatly.
Evangelicals say they're just reading the Bible plainly. But that reading, Israel and the Church as two peoples with two destinies, a rapture, a prophetic countdown, didn't exist before Darby.
Same era and same impulse that produced the Jehovah's Witnesses: a man convinced he'd finally cracked the end times timeline everyone before him missed.
But Christians did not first receive Scripture as a pile of proof texts. They heard it sung. They prayed it. They fasted with it. They heard it at feasts, baptisms, funerals, Eucharist, persecution.
The Church got Scripture as worship.
AI Bible answers sound Protestant because Protestantism basically trained the internet.
Treat the Bible like a legal database. Search the verse. Build the case. Win the doctrine.
That is why the machine is so good at it. It was made for that kind of work.