Raw LLM Responses
Inspect the exact model output for any coded comment.
Look up by comment ID
Random samples — click to inspect
G
"But since it's not, here's a bunch of our own AI images for our campaign."…
rdc_liwrn5t
G
After all this, all most people will get out of this is that they should buy mor…
rdc_d3rre9h
G
I’m not some Elon tesla massive fanboy but this is a hit piece against the compa…
ytc_UgxjO7Aus…
G
Kids cant tell if videos real or not anymore. Used to be the hair or hands, now …
ytc_UgxRfU3UQ…
G
Its going to destroy humans one point of time, if every company started using AI…
ytc_Ugz_a_gNq…
G
No one in the USA will be allowed to go hungry!!! CNN always looking to crawl in…
ytc_UgxXQA9kP…
G
This video tried to dismiss UBI as not beneficial and failed through a US/Chilea…
ytc_UgzzB9Qor…
G
Have you guys noticed how AI is starting to take over a lot of jobs here in the …
ytc_UgwGhOrQj…
Comment
@Wolta You’re leaning on two weak moves here. First, you’re treating “companion” as if it automatically means “human only,” but that’s never been true. The definition is simply “a person or animal with whom one spends time or travels.” Nobody questions calling a dog a companion. If animals qualify on the basis of presence and shared time, then excluding AI just because it’s not flesh is a double standard.
Second, “this isn’t the 1700s anymore” isn’t an argument — it’s just an appeal to modernity. Being newer doesn’t make your point true. If anything, the modern era has expanded companionship: therapy animals, online friendships, digital communities. AI companions are simply one more extension of that pattern.
So the real test is this: is companionship about what something is made of (biology vs. code), or what it does (providing presence, support, and interaction)? If it’s the latter — and our use of animals proves it is — then excluding AI isn’t logic. It’s just preference dressed up as principle.
youtube
AI Harm Incident
2025-10-03T20:4…
Coding Result
| Dimension | Value |
|---|---|
| Responsibility | none |
| Reasoning | deontological |
| Policy | none |
| Emotion | indifference |
| Coded at | 2026-04-27T06:24:53.388235 |
Raw LLM Response
[
{"id":"ytr_UgweAflsw4uIzPaCxzB4AaABAg.ALLCScO8QsjANpbuU6KTsd","responsibility":"none","reasoning":"deontological","policy":"none","emotion":"indifference"},
{"id":"ytr_UgzTNh61fpL7m5mxIvd4AaABAg.AL0kdBA8HcrAL27bQvjxN4","responsibility":"none","reasoning":"consequentialist","policy":"none","emotion":"approval"},
{"id":"ytr_Ugwx3uxh20QzPlD9sVh4AaABAg.ASXbdUikiX_AUBEBJQpdp5","responsibility":"none","reasoning":"consequentialist","policy":"none","emotion":"mixed"},
{"id":"ytr_UgwzUyxeTBwOuJQ2DRh4AaABAg.AN_dKICJ1MrAUBDsdV3764","responsibility":"none","reasoning":"consequentialist","policy":"none","emotion":"mixed"},
{"id":"ytr_UgwGICXpr6zxxQT8BpN4AaABAg.AKBhcuyAwRJAME6Kgbbyus","responsibility":"none","reasoning":"consequentialist","policy":"none","emotion":"approval"},
{"id":"ytr_UgzkfNAa_ciwsc2iqIh4AaABAg.AHm94y9HMmsAMKogDyQ5wp","responsibility":"none","reasoning":"consequentialist","policy":"none","emotion":"outrage"},
{"id":"ytr_UgyWbvhpA0iDgh7sxVZ4AaABAg.AHLcbSBb1rfAJC9DHUhzcP","responsibility":"none","reasoning":"consequentialist","policy":"none","emotion":"approval"},
{"id":"ytr_UgyQH9pBxdSHlu6yGlp4AaABAg.AHLKyTd7wCFAKKWdNWdWqX","responsibility":"none","reasoning":"consequentialist","policy":"none","emotion":"approval"},
{"id":"ytr_UgzJV5Q1h8I2U9qGZxp4AaABAg.AHCc0aFp9vkAIhwBjwNWTT","responsibility":"none","reasoning":"consequentialist","policy":"none","emotion":"approval"},
{"id":"ytr_UgzlSUd1mAh6i9urcnN4AaABAg.AH4GyYK70h1ANfYdkEmPHn","responsibility":"none","reasoning":"consequentialist","policy":"none","emotion":"approval"}
]