It's just a fucking chatbot.
The fact these tools are so flexible has far-reaching concerns - but we cannot seriously suggest the company is responsible, for making flexible tools. Turns out, most things can be misused. How far removed is this from saying 'the thieves extensively planned their heist using Google Maps,' like Google should be liable? What is the remedy, here, besides asking the company to spy on users more closely?
You can talk to computers now. They're not smart in the ways we wanted, but reasoning does occur. Even the small models presumably retain enough publicly-available military doctrine and equipment trivia to act like talking with an amoral gun nerd. That's not separable from having Son Of Clippy summarize your e-mail. (And frankly, letting a third party read all your e-mail is a more prevalent threat than gun violence.) If you can tell spicy autocomplete to roleplay Lara Croft, and expect it to know she'd use British spelling, then you can tell it to roleplay a bigoted military advisor and expect it to know anything that's in a Tom Clancy novel.
When the bubble bursts, this isn't going away. Safeguards don't work because LLMs are just smart enough to be tricked. We are not about to ban an entire category of software. Practically we couldn't, morally we shouldn't, and realistically we will not try. We have to get used to the idea that computers will just do things when asked. What you ask for is all you.
all 14 comments