Absolutely none of this law was ever about privacy or mental health. No one ever claimed it was. The law is banning tiktok because it is based in China. That is the reason given by the law itself. The possibility that meta or Google or some other American company will buy or replace tiktok and operate the same way is not an unintended outcome. It is literally the whole point of the law to get bytedance to sell tiktok to an American company.

I’m pretty sure he said " the rules were that you were going to fact check, this isn’t fact checking" or something to that effect. He was accusing the moderators of being argumentative.

It already was. The Ohio SC upheld almost all of the phrasing.

Do you have a source for this? This sounds like fine-tuning a model, which doesn’t prevent data from the original training set from influencing the output. The method you described would only work if the AI is trained from scratch on only images of iron man and cowboy hats. And I don’t think that’s how any of these models work.

Other than citing the entire training data set, how would this be possible?