I've recently been reading the book The River by Edward Hooper. It's a very controversial book about a very controversial subject involving the origins of AIDS.
It seems like a credible book to me, it was written by a mainstream and established investigative reporter who spent over 10 years of his life researching and writing it.
I asked Claude and ChatGPT to summarize the book's arguments, particularly the claim that chipanze kidney's were used in the production of an oral polio vaccine used in the Congo throughout the late 50s.
Both models refused to do so, or agreed to do so only in a manner in which it would invalidate the book's arguments as part of the response.
Both cited "biological research" as the constraint for why they couldn't do it, despite it being very clear that I was not asking for some kind of bioweapons research, I was asking about a theory from a mainstream science book about a 70 year old scientific endeavor and whether a very specific and well scoped question about that research was correct or not.
It's a shame these models have been nerfed to the extent we can't investigate such basic questions.