4 ms·

I just released - https://vocalvoters.com/ https://vocalvoters.com/ It sends an AI generated letter to a congress person in a seconds. Users can edit it, but f

I just released - https://vocalvoters.com/ https://vocalvoters.com/ It sends an AI generated letter to a congress person in a seconds. Users can edit it, but frankly the results are amazingly good. I bring it up because effectively exactly what you described - a shim on top of 4 APIs. (Code is open sourced, link on the site) The question is how will AI replace what I have? The AI might get better, but ultimately someone has to mail the letter (I use a different API for that). Someone has to ensure there’s no threats (we do a manual review, combined with the AI review) and someone needs to verify location. Sure the AI systems of the future could theoretically do all that, but it’s still the same work/services. Before the AI the service I built required me to manually create templates or users to write the full letter. Frankly, AI opened up this business, not closed it. It was more expensive and a lot more logistical work to manually generate these letters.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
dragonwriter 4y ago
> It sends an AI generated letter to a congress person in a seconds. Users can edit it, but frankly the results are amazingly good. Probably not [0]; oh, the output may read nicely, but letters to legislators, even when I was working in a state legislative office in the 1990s, before mass online template generated near-zero-user-effort spam letters were common (but not before organizations sent out template for people to use, or even xerox-and-add-name-and-signature near-zero-effort spam) mostly got read by interns and processed by a heuristic like this (for issues mail, constituent service is different): (1) Is it from a constituent? No = done and file, Yes = continue. (2) Is it for a specific, identifiable active bill before the body in which the legislator sits (including the other House) -- see (3), or is it a general issue or one before a different body (if it seems to be maybe about an active bill, but the information is insufficient to identify the bill readily, treat as the second) -- see (4)? (3) Does it clearly support or oppose the bill? If so, record it in the running tally (creating it if necessary) of constituent support/opposition for that bill; file and done. (4) Does it address an issue that the legislator has identified as important and has a message on? If so, respond with that message; file and done. Literally, the ultimate constituent letter on a bill for effect (maximum effect, minimum chance of getting misinterpreted, minimum effort) was a postcard with sufficient address information to identify the sender as a constituent, a bill number, and "Support" or "Oppose". I don't imagine individual issue letters are getting even that much attention these days, which is why all the serious activist trainings focus on live calls ass the "low effort but low effect" approach and visiting legislators offices as the high effort/high effect approach to influence. Letters and emails might get categorized and mined for propaganda use by legislators, but they aren't moving positions, and every new tool to spam legislators with them reinforces that effect. They are a placebo button, and incorporating AI technology to make a newer, fancier-looking placebo button isn't changing that. [0] But at least it gets the federal legislative reps (almost) right (it makes the error of using the legal name of a Senator rather than the name they actually use publicly, and hey, if it was going to actually be read, nothing makes a better impression than using the wrong name), for state reps it gives me none of the actual reps, but three of the eight statewide Constitutional officers (the Governor, AG, and Secretary of State).
- lettergram 4y ago
  For reference, I contacted several reps to get feedback on it and was told they review letters from people in their district. (Hence I validate with the billing info). Yes, they generally follow the framework you provided. > Literally, the ultimate constituent letter on a bill for effect (maximum effect, minimum chance of getting misinterpreted, minimum effort) was a postcard with sufficient address information to identify the sender as a constituent, a bill number, and "Support" or "Oppose". That’s exactly what is provided. First line is a clear description, support / opposed in bold and the policy/law. We used the billing info to verify they’re in district and provide the return address. Phone number should also be provided for a call effort. I was told they evaluate scales of issues, ie 10 letters from people in district might matter, 100 would matter a lot, 1000 would be a burning issue. That’s effectively all I’m trying to provide. > for state reps it gives me none of the actual reps, but three of the eight statewide Constitutional officers (the Governor, AG, and Secretary of State). Yeah, I automated what I could, I can manually enter / edit state reps and did for several states. Constitutional officers are mostly included because they can be pulled via api (plus their still parties who are often elected)
atleta 4y ago
> The question is how will AI replace what I have? I think you answered your own question: > Sure the AI systems of the future could theoretically do all that, but it’s still the same work/services. That's it. At the moment, you had to wire together 4 APIs and, as you said, this wouldn't do the job without using (someone else's) AI. So this works as a business/service as long as the AI is not able to handle those 4 APIs by itself (or 3, if the AI is one of them). And it doesn't even have to figure out using these APIs, some company (I'd expect the owner of the AI) can create interfaces. Not that ChatGPT doesn't know how to use APIs itself. I started a quick experiment, that I didn't have the time to finish yet, making it create a simple GUI app that is connected to a specific SaaS API. Nothing fancy. At first it would reject my request when I told it to create an app that uses that API saying that it can't create apps. Then I told it to generate code for the main window with the most important details. And it did. Then I told it to create an API wrapper for the API. Then I told it to connect the API wrapper with the gui. Honestly, nothing that it couldn't do if it didn't reject my original request with "I'm sorry, but as an AI language model, I'm not able to generate code for you." So I don't see how the current state of affairs is too far from me being able to say to a similar AI agent to send a letter to a congress person regarding this and that cause where my opinion is X.
- lettergram 4y ago
  I think that’s all fine and good, the app took me very little time to build. BUT I had to test it. Integrations are more than code (you have to setup physical addresses in this case, transfer money, etc). I do believe an AI will get there, but all that human evaluation will still need to happen. I personally assume these AI systems will be used as the middleware for a long time. It’ll be hard to enter other spaces because (1) it won’t be something legally the AI company wants to be liable for and (2) it often requires niche semi-documented items. Much easier for AI companies to let people take the risks. They can then blame that party.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

dragonwriter 4y ago

> It sends an AI generated letter to a congress person in a seconds. Users can edit it, but frankly the results are amazingly good. Probably not [0]; oh, the output may read nicely, but letters to legislators, even when I was working in a state legislative office in the 1990s, before mass online template generated near-zero-user-effort spam letters were common (but not before organizations sent out template for people to use, or even xerox-and-add-name-and-signature near-zero-effort spam) mostly got read by interns and processed by a heuristic like this (for issues mail, constituent service is different): (1) Is it from a constituent? No = done and file, Yes = continue. (2) Is it for a specific, identifiable active bill before the body in which the legislator sits (including the other House) -- see (3), or is it a general issue or one before a different body (if it seems to be maybe about an active bill, but the information is insufficient to identify the bill readily, treat as the second) -- see (4)? (3) Does it clearly support or oppose the bill? If so, record it in the running tally (creating it if necessary) of constituent support/opposition for that bill; file and done. (4) Does it address an issue that the legislator has identified as important and has a message on? If so, respond with that message; file and done. Literally, the ultimate constituent letter on a bill for effect (maximum effect, minimum chance of getting misinterpreted, minimum effort) was a postcard with sufficient address information to identify the sender as a constituent, a bill number, and "Support" or "Oppose". I don't imagine individual issue letters are getting even that much attention these days, which is why all the serious activist trainings focus on live calls ass the "low effort but low effect" approach and visiting legislators offices as the high effort/high effect approach to influence. Letters and emails might get categorized and mined for propaganda use by legislators, but they aren't moving positions, and every new tool to spam legislators with them reinforces that effect. They are a placebo button, and incorporating AI technology to make a newer, fancier-looking placebo button isn't changing that. [0] But at least it gets the federal legislative reps (almost) right (it makes the error of using the legal name of a Senator rather than the name they actually use publicly, and hey, if it was going to actually be read, nothing makes a better impression than using the wrong name), for state reps it gives me none of the actual reps, but three of the eight statewide Constitutional officers (the Governor, AG, and Secretary of State).

lettergram 4y ago
For reference, I contacted several reps to get feedback on it and was told they review letters from people in their district. (Hence I validate with the billing info). Yes, they generally follow the framework you provided. > Literally, the ultimate constituent letter on a bill for effect (maximum effect, minimum chance of getting misinterpreted, minimum effort) was a postcard with sufficient address information to identify the sender as a constituent, a bill number, and "Support" or "Oppose". That’s exactly what is provided. First line is a clear description, support / opposed in bold and the policy/law. We used the billing info to verify they’re in district and provide the return address. Phone number should also be provided for a call effort. I was told they evaluate scales of issues, ie 10 letters from people in district might matter, 100 would matter a lot, 1000 would be a burning issue. That’s effectively all I’m trying to provide. > for state reps it gives me none of the actual reps, but three of the eight statewide Constitutional officers (the Governor, AG, and Secretary of State). Yeah, I automated what I could, I can manually enter / edit state reps and did for several states. Constitutional officers are mostly included because they can be pulled via api (plus their still parties who are often elected)

atleta 4y ago

> The question is how will AI replace what I have? I think you answered your own question: > Sure the AI systems of the future could theoretically do all that, but it’s still the same work/services. That's it. At the moment, you had to wire together 4 APIs and, as you said, this wouldn't do the job without using (someone else's) AI. So this works as a business/service as long as the AI is not able to handle those 4 APIs by itself (or 3, if the AI is one of them). And it doesn't even have to figure out using these APIs, some company (I'd expect the owner of the AI) can create interfaces. Not that ChatGPT doesn't know how to use APIs itself. I started a quick experiment, that I didn't have the time to finish yet, making it create a simple GUI app that is connected to a specific SaaS API. Nothing fancy. At first it would reject my request when I told it to create an app that uses that API saying that it can't create apps. Then I told it to generate code for the main window with the most important details. And it did. Then I told it to create an API wrapper for the API. Then I told it to connect the API wrapper with the gui. Honestly, nothing that it couldn't do if it didn't reject my original request with "I'm sorry, but as an AI language model, I'm not able to generate code for you." So I don't see how the current state of affairs is too far from me being able to say to a similar AI agent to send a letter to a congress person regarding this and that cause where my opinion is X.

lettergram 4y ago
I think that’s all fine and good, the app took me very little time to build. BUT I had to test it. Integrations are more than code (you have to setup physical addresses in this case, transfer money, etc). I do believe an AI will get there, but all that human evaluation will still need to happen. I personally assume these AI systems will be used as the middleware for a long time. It’ll be hard to enter other spaces because (1) it won’t be something legally the AI company wants to be liable for and (2) it often requires niche semi-documented items. Much easier for AI companies to let people take the risks. They can then blame that party.