Comment by Brendinooo

>please stop trolling and provoking.

That is not my intent.

I have spoken English my whole life and have never heard anyone use "tentative" as a noun. Why must you assume I am trolling, why can you not believe what I am saying? Is it possible that you are using the wrong word? It seems noteworthy to me that you did not actually answer my question or provide a definition for how you are using, you chose to assume bad faith on my part instead and use that as a basis to dismiss the actual arguments I made.

That said, I would be happy to stop arguing about the word "tentative". I would much rather you engage with the substantive arguments that I made.

>the repeated statements clearly confirms your negative intention

What repeated statements? If it's important to you for understanding then pick something that I repeated and I can try to explain.

> ::your three list items::

These are just repeating of arguments that I made and offered responses to. You have chosen to not respond to them.

Let's pick one and try again:

> The article clearly explain the information poisoning

If you search the article for "poison", there is exactly one reference: "Others refer to this practice of influencing artificial intelligence as 'LLM poisoning.'" The word "refer links to an article by Anthropic that is categorically unrelated. Go read that article and answer: does their definition of "poisoning" match what the author of this post means?

I would say no: the article says "malicious actors can inject specific text into these posts to make a model learn undesirable or dangerous behaviors, in a process known as poisoning", and then follows up with an example of "introducing backdoors". That is very different than whatever the Hanover Institute site is doing.

If you would prefer to argue substance, answer me that: did the author cite that paper correctly? I am saying "no" and have given a reason, what is your response?