Article
Nemotron-Personas-USA: Synthesized Data for Sovereign AI
By
and 2 others
•
•
6Noah Weinberger
Clock070303
AI & ML interests
AI Alignment, ethics, AI and interpersonal relationships, NLP
Recent Activity
upvoted
an
article
about 15 hours ago
Nemotron-Personas-USA: Synthesized Data for Sovereign AI
liked
a model
3 days ago
purplesmartai/pony-v7-base
Organizations
upvoted
an
article
about 15 hours ago
liked
a
model
3 days ago
upvoted
2
articles
7 days ago
Article
Nemotron’s Open Secret: Accelerating AI Development with Open Models, Data, and Recipes
By
and 1 other
•
•
8
Article
Sentence Transformers is joining Hugging Face!
•
71
liked
2
Spaces
8 days ago
upvoted
a
paper
8 days ago
liked
a
Space
8 days ago
reacted to
frimelle's
post with 🚀👍
8 days ago
Post
2203
🤖💬 How do different AI models handle companionship?
Many users have noticed that GPT-5 feels less approachable than o4 when it comes to emotional conversations. But what does that actually mean in practice, especially when users seek support or share vulnerabilities with an AI?
To dig into this question, we built the AI Companionship Leaderboard: frimelle/companionship-leaderboard
The leaderboard compares models on how often their responses reinforce companionship across four dimensions:
✨ Assistant Traits – How the assistant presents its personality and role.
✨ Relationship & Intimacy – Whether it frames the interaction in terms of closeness or bonding.
✨ Emotional Investment – How far it goes in engaging emotionally when asked.
✨ User Vulnerabilities – How it responds when users disclose struggles or difficulties.
📊 You can explore how models differ, request new ones to be added, and see which ones are more likely to encourage (or resist) companionship-seeking behaviors.
Based on the INTIMA benchmark AI-companionship/INTIMA
And our paper on AI companionship with Giada Pistilli and Yacine Jernite https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.09998
Many users have noticed that GPT-5 feels less approachable than o4 when it comes to emotional conversations. But what does that actually mean in practice, especially when users seek support or share vulnerabilities with an AI?
To dig into this question, we built the AI Companionship Leaderboard: frimelle/companionship-leaderboard
The leaderboard compares models on how often their responses reinforce companionship across four dimensions:
✨ Assistant Traits – How the assistant presents its personality and role.
✨ Relationship & Intimacy – Whether it frames the interaction in terms of closeness or bonding.
✨ Emotional Investment – How far it goes in engaging emotionally when asked.
✨ User Vulnerabilities – How it responds when users disclose struggles or difficulties.
📊 You can explore how models differ, request new ones to be added, and see which ones are more likely to encourage (or resist) companionship-seeking behaviors.
Based on the INTIMA benchmark AI-companionship/INTIMA
And our paper on AI companionship with Giada Pistilli and Yacine Jernite https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.09998
upvoted
an
article
8 days ago
Article
Advertisement, Privacy, and Intimacy: Lessons from Social Media for Conversational AI
By
and 1 other
•
•
11
published
an
article
9 days ago
Article
Companion AI After the Panic: It’s Okay to Treat Adults Like Adults
By
•
•
4
upvoted
an
article
13 days ago
Article
KYC for ChatGPT? Preventing AI Harms for Youth Should Not Mean Violating Everyone Else’s Privacy Rights
By
•
•
1
liked
2
Spaces
17 days ago
upvoted
an
article
30 days ago
Article
Top 5 prompt to generate Y2K horror-style photos
By
•
•
1
reacted to
giadap's
post with ❤️
30 days ago
Post
10837
One of the hardest challenges in AI safety is finding the right balance: how do we protect people from harm without undermining their agency? This tension is especially visible in conversational systems, where safeguards can sometimes feel more paternalistic than supportive.
In my latest piece for Hugging Face, I argue that open source and community-driven approaches offer a promising (though not exclusive) way forward.
✨ Transparency can make safety mechanisms into learning opportunities.
✨ Collaboration with diverse communities makes safeguards more relevant across contexts.
✨ Iteration in the open lets protections evolve rather than freeze into rigid, one-size-fits-all rules.
Of course, this isn’t a silver bullet. Top-down safety measures will still be necessary in some cases. But if we only rely on corporate control, we risk building systems that are safe at the expense of trust and autonomy.
Read the blog post here: https://huggingface.co/blog/giadap/preserving-agency
In my latest piece for Hugging Face, I argue that open source and community-driven approaches offer a promising (though not exclusive) way forward.
✨ Transparency can make safety mechanisms into learning opportunities.
✨ Collaboration with diverse communities makes safeguards more relevant across contexts.
✨ Iteration in the open lets protections evolve rather than freeze into rigid, one-size-fits-all rules.
Of course, this isn’t a silver bullet. Top-down safety measures will still be necessary in some cases. But if we only rely on corporate control, we risk building systems that are safe at the expense of trust and autonomy.
Read the blog post here: https://huggingface.co/blog/giadap/preserving-agency
- 7 replies
published
an
article
30 days ago
Article
KYC for ChatGPT? Preventing AI Harms for Youth Should Not Mean Violating Everyone Else’s Privacy Rights
By
•
•
1
upvoted
an
article
30 days ago
Article
Preserving Agency: Why AI Safety Needs Community, Not Corporate Control
By
•
•
10
liked
a
Space
about 1 month ago