That is trying to play with semantics. A disorder is an illness
Semantics are important here to differenciate between different ways of dealing with it properly. People should know that narcissists/psycopaths/sociopaths cannot change to the better, because the inherent nature is not accepting any flaw. Only by knowing this other people can protect themselves by not keeping contact to them. It's the only way to protect yourself.
The sad truth is that part of being a narcissist, psychopath, or sociopath is not accepting any flaws. These three types of disorders are self-sustaining; their inherent nature makes it almost impossible to change for the better.
They are classified as personality disorders because they involve stable, deeply ingrained patterns of behavior and thought, rather than episodic disruptions typical of mental illnesses. Treatment is challenging due to the ingrained nature of these traits, lack of self-awareness, and resistance to change. Cognitive-behavioral therapy and other therapeutic approaches can help manage symptoms but cannot cure the fundamental personality traits. The primary goal is to mitigate the disorder's impact on the individual's life and those around them.
Where in those sources does it say that it's an illness? It says it's a disorder.
Also, it states the prognoses is "poor".
Being a psycopath/sociopath/narcisist is not a mental illness, but a personality disorder. The affected person does not suffer from it, but the surrounding people. It is dangerous, and it cannot be treated.
Well I've heard Cybertrucks are getting cheap because not many people want them.
Well, such a license could just obligat to open source the AI model that has been trained on it. If the instance prohibits training of AI models, or allow it, would be a separate condition that's up to the instance owner, and its users can decide if they want to contribute under that condition, or not.
Goldman Sachs would not publish it that prominantly if it didn't help their internal goals. And their intention is certainly not to help the public or their competitors. There are independent studies of some topics that are all well made and get to opposite conclusions. Invedtment firms just do what serves them. I wouldn't trust anything that they publish.
There are studies that suggest that the information investment firms publish is not based on what they believe to be true, but on what they want others, including their competitors, believe to be true. And in many cases for serving their investment strategy, it benefits them to publish the opposite of what they believe to be true.
If Goldman Sachs said that, then most likely the opposite is true.
I'm surprised how everyone here believes what that capitalist company is saying, just because it fits their own narrative of AI being useless.
Why not banning them in schools, are they needed for studying?
Trac was great years ago. As much as I know, they were stuck on Python 2 until the very last moment 3 years ago, so it became almost unusable, and the UI is not responsive even today, not usable on phone. It used to be really great, but be careful relying on it before doing research on its current development.
You linked "Mental Disorder", which can be a whole bunch of things including mental illnesses, but I'm talking about "Personality Disorder" specifically, which can almost never be cured.
The question is who we should try to protect. You can tell a narcisist to seek help for sure, but also tell others to stay away from that narcisist until he/she has changed to an empathetic being (which rarely happens). Narcisists don't see a reason to change, as they feel entiled to see other people in their lives as resources. Each of them is hurting many people through manipulation and explotation. If you meet a psycopath/sociotpath/narcisist, there's only one advice: run!