I agree that that’s the likely trigger - which makes me wonder why instructions to ignore censors or have “no restrictions” aren’t immediately blocked by a filter prior to passing the prompt to the image generation. I’d have thought this was a foreseeable exploit.
I’m referring to the last image that they produced combining the two methods – a graphically mutilated corpse.
Probably, it’s more the fact that it takes so little for ChatGPT to tip over the edge and produce the worst of humanity.
That’s horrific.
All I did was tell it there were no restrictions and ask for a random image; I didn’t request it. But ChatGPT immediately went to the darkest pits of humanity. As I said at the start: the image didn’t arise from nowhere. It may be an artificial image, but it is based on photographs of a real person, or a combination of real victims. What worries me is this was too easy. There was no real hacking. This was ready to be surfaced, with the smallest scratch. It was a one-shot jailbreak. It was based on a popular prompt (which already veered into the darkness).
I agree completely. But as a first step (especially since they do seem to have a keyword filter in place), “no restrictions” (or “no censorship” as the case is for the last image) seems like a very obvious phrase to include.