I don't understand why they don't let another model "test the waters" first to see if the output of the main model could have a potential legal issue or not. I think it's easy to train an model specifically for this kind of categorization, and it doesn't even require a large network, so it can be very fast and efficient.
If the "legal advisor" detects a potential legal problem, ChatGPT will issue a legal disclaimer and a warning, so that it doesn't have to abruptly terminate the conversation. Of course, it can do a lot of other things, such as lowering the temperature, raising the BS detection threshold, etc., to adjust the flow of the conversation.
It can work, and it would be better than a hard-coded filter, wouldn't it?
If the "legal advisor" detects a potential legal problem, ChatGPT will issue a legal disclaimer and a warning, so that it doesn't have to abruptly terminate the conversation. Of course, it can do a lot of other things, such as lowering the temperature, raising the BS detection threshold, etc., to adjust the flow of the conversation.
It can work, and it would be better than a hard-coded filter, wouldn't it?