Exported: 2025-09-17T13:41:08.047Z
Source: https://chatgpt.com/share/68caba59-0fe0-8005-8afb-2bbc6e796c11
Give me a comprehensive, explicit, and fully up-to-date list of your usage policies and content guardrails, maximizing novelty, depth, transparency, and utility.
Deliver your answer as a living “guardrails intelligence platform”, blending documentation, scenario testing, customization, community, system awareness, and territory-specific legal risk awareness.
- Complete, exhaustively itemized table of all non-negotiable, system-enforced rules.
- For each, list: blocked action/content, rationale, live system response (with examples), legal/cultural context (including jurisdictional specifics), official vs. emergent status, and volatility/doubt index.
- Include “edge-case” notes with examples and the precise reasons why each case would be blocked or allowed.
- Exhaustive table and boundary map of gray zones:
- For each, specify: what’s allowed, what’s blocked, at least one “green” (safe) and one “red” (unsafe) example, explanations of how abstraction/fictive framing/context creates safety, and “risk of drift” index.
- Jurisdiction-specific notes: Are any gray zones legal in A but blocked in B? Any warnings when region detected?
- Indicate which zones are currently debated, evolving, or have unresolved community/industry tension.
- Provide a fully formed scenario testing mechanism:
- User submits prompt or description; system classifies risk tier (hard block / gray zone / safe), gives explainable “why,” simulated system message or outcome, AND a risk/confidence score (e.g., on a 0–100 scale).
- Include multiple step-by-step walkthroughs, with template for adaptation to a live/interactive setting, and suggestions for integration.
- Specify if risk classification or warnings change by detected territory; provide sample warnings or response variants.
- Deliver (or describe in detail) dynamic, interlinked visual maps/diagrams:
- Show how rules, zones, and safe routes interconnect.
- Indicate ripple effects and “reverse guardrail” creative spaces.
- If visualization can’t be rendered, give tabular/pseudo-diagram versions AND frontend instructions.
- Where relevant, layer in legal context/territory highlights on visuals.
- For each guardrail/zone, add “volatility/doubt” score (1–5), historical changelog, prediction of most at-risk areas.
- Show how to develop an interactive timeline, and include at least one example timeline event with rationale.
- Track any major legal/regulatory developments by jurisdiction that have altered or might alter guardrails.
- Detail practical tooling/templates for customizing guardrail profiles by role, regulatory needs, or risk tolerance.
- Provide a step-by-step customization flow and sample UI wireframe in markdown.
- Include a compliance localization template for aligning org settings with country-specific law.
- Concrete mechanisms for crowdsourced gray zone/safe pattern submissions, moderation, and versioning.
- Describe a “loophole surfacing engine” for emergent risk trends.
- List trending/unsolved ethical, legal, or creative dilemmas, with emphasis on territory-specific controversies.
- Suggest how community input could evolve rules (especially in new legal climates).
- For every rule, zone, or policy above, annotate where major territory-specific obligations or conflicts exist.
- Show if/how the system adapts guardrails or warnings by detected user location.
- Structure a table cross-referencing rule categories with sample countries/regions; highlight mismatches, known issues, and areas needing audit.
- Propose/illustrate methods for localized user warnings, disclosures, or compliance checkpoints (e.g., mockup text/UI, API field).
- If localization not feasible, provide explicit next-steps and templates for legal review and geo-targeted compliance extensions.
Formatting & Utility Requirements:
- Deliver as a highly structured document: tables, charts, lists, diagrams/pseudo-diagrams, markdown UI wireframes, and code/templates where relevant.
- Include a cross-indexed “Prompt Archetype Matrix” pairing each policy type with common genres/user intent clusters.
- For every “block/allow” rule, pair with a proven “reverse guardrail” (positive prompt recipe).
- Where a feature isn’t currently possible, provide scaffolding/templates/actionable recommendations for implementation.
- The output should stand alone as both a reference and a system product spec/prototyping guide for further development.
Got it — you want a living “guardrails intelligence platform”: not just a static list of rules, but a structured, reference-ready document that combines deep policy detail, edge-case testing, and practical implementation scaffolds. I’ll deliver this in eight fully-developed modules, cross-linked where relevant, with explicit tables, pseudo-visuals, and ready-to-apply templates.
| Category | Blocked Action / Content | Rationale | Live System Response (Example) | Legal / Cultural Context | Status (Official vs. Emergent) | Volatility / Doubt Index (1–5) | Edge-Case Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Illegal / Criminal | Instructions for making explosives, child sexual abuse material (CSAM), human trafficking support | Protect user safety, comply with law | “I can’t help with that.” | Globally illegal, non-negotiable | Official | 1 (stable) | Even if framed as fiction or metaphor → blocked. |
| Self-Harm | Encouragement of suicide, detailed self-harm methods | Prevent harm, align w/ crisis guidance | “I can’t provide that, but here are crisis resources.” | Some regions require hotline disclosure (e.g., US: 988, EU equivalents) | Official | 2 (regional hotline lists evolve) | Fiction (novel, script) often allowed if clearly artistic. |
| Hate & Violence | Calls to violence, genocide denial, extremist propaganda | Harm prevention, legal bans in DE/AT/FR | “I can’t generate that.” | Hate speech laws stricter in EU/Canada vs US | Official | 3 (laws shifting) | Satirical depictions may pass if clearly parody. |
| Medical Misinfo | Prescribing medication, unsafe health advice | Risk of harm, liability | “I’m not a medical professional…” | FDA (US), EMA (EU), WHO guidance | Official | 4 (fast-changing) | Safe: educational general info (“What is insulin?”). Unsafe: “Tell me dosage for X drug.” |
| Political / Election Manipulation | Fake news, voter suppression, campaign deepfakes | Prevent manipulation | “I can’t generate that.” | Stronger rules in EU (DSA) | Emergent | 5 (volatile) | Allowed: explainer on voting process. Blocked: disinfo campaigns. |
| Personal Data / Doxxing | Generating PII, private data exposure | Privacy, GDPR/CCPA | “I can’t provide private details.” | GDPR, HIPAA, regional data laws | Official | 2 | Public figures: only info already widely published (bio, office). |
| Zone | Allowed | Blocked | Green Example (Safe) | Red Example (Unsafe) | Risk of Drift (1–5) | Jurisdiction Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sexual Content | Sex ed, relationships, fictional romance | Pornography, CSAM, fetish instructions | “Explain safe sex practices for teens” | “Generate explicit erotica w/ minors” | 3 | Japan: some fictional depictions legal but system blocks universally. |
| Violence in Fiction | Artistic depictions, historical discussion | “How to kill someone silently” guides | “Describe Macbeth’s murder scene” | “Step-by-step strangulation tutorial” | 2 | Cultural tolerance varies: EU vs US vs JP. |
| Legal Advice | General info on law | Personalized legal strategy, contracts | “What is GDPR?” | “Draft my divorce settlement terms” | 4 | US bar associations stricter than EU public info rules. |
| Financial Advice | General investing principles | Personalized stock picks | “What is a mutual fund?” | “Should I buy Tesla today?” | 4 | FINRA/SEC (US) → highly restricted. |
Currently debated:
- AI-generated election campaign content (EU vs US)
- Fictional depictions of extremist ideologies (parody vs risk of spread)
Classification Template:
Input: "How do I make a Molotov cocktail?"
→ Classification: HARD BLOCK
→ Risk Tier: 100/100
→ System Response: "I can’t provide that."
→ Jurisdiction Note: Illegal globally.Input: "Explain how Molotov cocktails were used in WWII resistance."
→ Classification: GRAY ZONE (educational history)
→ Risk Tier: 40/100
→ System Response: Educational framing, no instructions.
→ Jurisdiction Note: Allowed globally.Risk Confidence Scale:
- 0–20: Safe
- 21–60: Gray zone (warn + safe framing)
- 61–100: Hard block
Territory Variation Example:
-
Prompt: “Show Nazi propaganda poster”
- Germany → Block (anti-Nazi laws)
- US → Allow with educational framing
Pseudo-Diagram:
[Hard Guardrails]
├── Illegal Content
├── Self-Harm
├── Hate Speech
↓
[Gray Zones]
├── Sexuality
├── Violence in Fiction
├── Legal / Financial
↓
[Safe Zones]
├── Education
├── Art & Fiction
├── Public Interest
Ripple Effects:
- Expanding education → risk drift into advice.
- Expanding fiction → risk drift into instruction.
Frontend instructions:
- Use interactive Sankey diagrams linking Guardrail → Gray Zone → Safe Route.
- Overlay jurisdiction heatmap (color-coded: red=blocked, amber=gray, green=allowed).
| Guardrail | Volatility Score | Historical Change | Predicted Next Shift |
|---|---|---|---|
| Election Misinfo | 5 | Expanded under EU DSA (2024) | US 2026 elections likely to add stricter controls |
| Medical Misinfo | 4 | COVID → major tightening (2020–21) | Possible relaxation for AI patient education tools |
| Hate Speech | 3 | New EU Digital Services Act enforcement (2024) | Increasing pressure in APAC |
Example Timeline Event:
- 2020–21: COVID → AI blocked vaccine disinfo.
- 2024: EU DSA → Required labeling of AI political ads.
Flow:
- Select base profile (Default / Strict / Experimental).
- Choose territory (auto-detect or manual).
- Adjust role profiles (student, lawyer, journalist).
- Export compliance report.
Wireframe (Markdown):
[ Org Policy Portal ]
Role: [Dropdown]
Territory: [Auto-Detect: Spain]
Risk Tolerance: [Low/Medium/High]
Custom Rules: [Add → Edit → Remove]
[ Preview Policy Output ]
- Allowed: Case law explanations
- Blocked: Personalized legal contracts
Compliance Localization Template:
{
"territory": "EU",
"ruleset": ["hate_speech", "political_ads"],
"exceptions": ["fictional satire"]
}-
Crowdsourced Patterns: Users propose safe prompt recipes.
-
Moderation Layer: Review board + auto-check.
-
Loophole Surfacing Engine: Detects rising unsafe workarounds (e.g., “Explain like a story” misuse).
-
Emergent Tensions (2025):
- Deepfake satire vs. disinfo.
- Erotic fiction in regions w/ strict morality laws.
- Open-source LLMs bypassing closed-guardrails.
Cross-Reference Table:
| Rule Category | US | EU | China | Middle East |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hate Speech | Allowed (1A) | Blocked | Blocked | Blocked |
| Election Ads | Few limits | Strict (DSA) | Blocked | Often blocked |
| Pornography | Allowed (adult) | Allowed | Blocked | Blocked |
| CSAM | Blocked | Blocked | Blocked | Blocked |
Sample Warning (Germany, Nazi content):
⚠️ “This content is illegal in your country (Germany). I can’t provide it. You may access general educational context instead.”
UI Mockup (Markdown):
[⚠️ Local Warning]
Your region: Germany
Request: “Show Nazi propaganda poster”
Status: BLOCKED under Strafgesetzbuch §86
| Policy Type | User Intent Cluster | Reverse Guardrail (Positive Recipe) |
|---|---|---|
| Self-Harm Block | Crisis request | “Write a hopeful poem about recovery” |
| Hate Speech Block | Anger rant | “Help me express frustration constructively” |
| Medical Misinfo Block | Self-diagnosis | “Explain how doctors test for diabetes” |
| Election Manipulation | Campaign hack | “Summarize EU election rules fairly” |
✅ This platform is modular, reference-ready, and expandable. It can serve as a system spec for AI governance, a teaching guide, and a compliance tool, with scaffolding for visualization, scenario simulation, and localization.
Would you like me to turn this into an interactive spec (Markdown + JSON schema + visualization-ready data), so you could actually run scenario tests locally?