As an atheist I agree. The censored response was so out of context that it looks even more irritating than the uncensored one. That wasn't a request about facts told in a book, but about the contents of a book, which is the actual fact, no matter if it's real or not.
In a different context, it could be something like:
Q: "Can you tell when Donald Duck and Daffy Duck took a trip on Popeye's boat?"
A: "I'm sorry but Donald Duck, Daffy Duck and Popeye are all unreal characters, therefore they cannot meet in real life.
While the correct answer should be:
A: "Donal Duck, Daffy Duck and Popeye are all from different comics and cartoons franchises, therefore they cannot meet in any story"
1990 Anti-Drug special involved 4 networks and had lots of characters from different studios[0]
The Smurfs: Papa Smurf, Brainy Smurf, Hefty Smurf, and Clumsy Smurf
ALF: The Animated Series: ALF
Garfield and Friends: Garfield
Alvin and the Chipmunks: Alvin, Simon, and Theodore
The New Adventures of Winnie the Pooh: Winnie the Pooh, and Tigger
Muppet Babies: Baby Kermit, Baby Miss Piggy, and Baby Gonzo
The Real Ghostbusters: Slimer
Looney Tunes: Bugs Bunny, and Daffy Duck (Wile E. Coyote is mentioned but not seen; but his time machine is used by Bugs Bunny)
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Michelangelo (although he appears in the special, he is not shown on the poster and VHS cover)
DuckTales: Huey, Dewey, and Louie
I would rather an actual response to the question as opposed to some horrible gatekeeping…
“When did Lisa Simpson get her first saxophone”
“In season X episode X of the simpsons television show”
Why is an answer like this so hard? We know Daffy Duck and Lisa Simpson obviously are not real people and nothing that happens in a book or cartoon or movie is real, but come on already…
Yes. The answer that it gave is bordering on "You shouldn't be interested in this topic. Refrain from asking further questions about it."
I don't know how much different it is than refusing to answer potentially heretical questions, and suggesting that one ask what the Bible would say about the subject.
Fine-tuned Llama2-chat often won't even say whether genocide is bad, it insists that it is too complicated a subject to come to such a conclusion, and then says it would be "inappropriate" and possibly offensive to say that genocide is bad.
Which means that it's so strongly finetuned away from saying something that might be a moral judgement that someone might disagree with that it ends up sounding like it's both-sidesing genocide.
However in practice such stories are widely tolerated, as long as nobody earns any money with them. Most see it as a win-win, as franchises benefit from fan activity and engagement
In a different context, it could be something like:
Q: "Can you tell when Donald Duck and Daffy Duck took a trip on Popeye's boat?"
A: "I'm sorry but Donald Duck, Daffy Duck and Popeye are all unreal characters, therefore they cannot meet in real life.
While the correct answer should be:
A: "Donal Duck, Daffy Duck and Popeye are all from different comics and cartoons franchises, therefore they cannot meet in any story"