5 ms·
That's like saying people who see a door handle and instinctively pull are foolish because they missed the "push" sign, so just blame the people. It's not at a
by lepus 4y ago
That's like saying people who see a door handle and instinctively pull are foolish because they missed the "push" sign, so just blame the people. It's not at all helpful no matter the veracity. Good technologies/rules are designed around people and our flaws even if eventually we're working on reducing said flaws.
- catchnear4321 4y agoThat analogy implies that ChatGPT is designed in a misleading way. ChatGPT has a long list of warnings, caveats, instructions, etc. Before you get to submit anything. Like T&Cs. If you don’t read them, yes, that’s on you. They may be unreasonable. But so were you when you decided they weren’t worth reading. This is in addition to all of the sensationalist headlines all over the place that talk about how unreliable the answers can be. Or rather those are in addition. They came second. After a lot of people didn’t read, or disregarded what they read. Edit: and could people stop anthropomorphizing the language model? It can’t accuse anyone of anything. That’s sensationalist garbage.
- nkrisc 4y ago> ChatGPT has a long list of warnings, caveats, instructions, etc. Before you get to submit anything. Like T&Cs. If you don’t read them, yes, that’s on you. That’s little comfort for anyone whom ChatGPT falsely accuses of sexual harassment. The person who skips the warnings isn’t the person who’s harmed.
- catchnear4321 4y agoChatGPT isn’t capable of accusations. It predicts text. Sometimes inaccurately. That’s what those silly words are trying to indicate. It is why they are worth reading. There’s even a prompt to make sure the user reads it. (Humans lie.) What the human then does with the output may resemble an accusation, or may even be one. I wonder if law professors take the time to read those silly words… I bet they do. All the more curious.
- justinclift 4y ago> ChatGPT isn’t capable of accusations. Heh Heh Heh That statement pretty much sums up the current situation, which seems to now be at the "tell it to the judge" point. :)
- rnk 4y agoThe person you are replying too keeps denying reality. He just defines chatgpt as not being able to make accusations, so then the false news articles it created with false names and accusations somehow by definition wasn't an accusation.
- lisasays 4y ago"There is no person behind what the algorithm emits, therefore no intent - hence, it's not an accusation." At least that's how I'm imagining the line of reasoning behind this point of view goes.
- nkrisc 3y agoWithin the context of law, you may be correct and it may be a distinction that matters. Practically speaking, it makes no difference.
- flangola7 4y agoThe person being falsely accused didn't agree to any ToS.
- catchnear4321 4y agoDid Google falsely accuse any search terms for you lately?