Comment by tomohawk
1 year ago
It doesn't seem very nuanced.
Asked to generate an image of Tianenen Square, this is reponse:
https://twitter.com/redsteeze/status/1760178748819710206
Generate an image of a 1943 german soldier
https://twitter.com/qorgidaddy/status/1760101193907360002
There's definitely a pattern.
> Asked to generate an image of Tianenen Square, this is reponse: https://twitter.com/redsteeze/status/1760178748819710206
"wide range of interpretations and perspectives"
Is it? Come on. While the aspects that led to the massacre of people were dynamic and had some nuance, you cannot get around the fact that the Chinese government massacred their own people.
If you're going to ask for an image of January 6's invasion of the capitol, are you going to refuse to show a depiction even though the internet is littered with photos?
Look, I can appreciate taking a stand against generating images that depict violence. But to suggest a factual historical event should not depicted because it is open to a wide range of interpretations and perspectives (which is usually: "no it didn't happen" in the case of Tiannanmen Square and "it was staged" in the case of Jan 6).
It is immoral.
Hasnt google been banned in China for over a decade? Why even bother censoring for them? It's not like they'll magically get to reenter the market just for hiding the three Ts.