3 ms·

If I offer you a sentence for your article, and you accept it and include it, your authorial independence is undiminished. If someone prevented you from includi

If I offer you a sentence for your article, and you accept it and include it, your authorial independence is undiminished. If someone prevented you from including that sentence, your independence is diminished, even if more of the article is in your own words. The same is true if the sentence is offered by a software algorithm. The freedom to accept or not the words of a {stochastic parrot, emerging intelligence} is a new degree of freedom of the press rather than a regression.

cj 3y ago
I watched Simulant last night (mediocre movie about human-like AI robots taking over the world). One of the "laws" in the fake world in the movie was something like "AI must only be used when it's being supervised and doing things at the direction of a human" I thought this was actually an interesting way to think about it. E.g. If it becomes possible to tell ChatGPT to "spin up a website in the format of NYTimes.com and post 15 new articles relating to recent events each day. publish articles without human review". I think prompts like would really degrade the internet if we also pair it with prompts like "Create twitter accounts, fake engagement for 6 months or until you reach 5000 followers, then start promoting my NY Times clone using these accounts without getting banned from Twitter" That sort of prompt 1) performs an initial action, which is fine, but 2) also creates a repeating action that continues the AI's use into the future in an unsupervised manner and in a way that its output is used verbatim unreviewed by a human. I think this whole AI ban discussion needs to be a lot more nuanced. We can't just throw "freedom of speech" at the argument and call it a day. Honestly, I just don't want to live in a world where 10 years from now my coworkers are able to write a prompt "I'm taking a day off tomorrow without telling anyone so simulate me on Slack. Join daily standup at 9am using an undetectable deep fake. Answer the questions in the style of everyone else. Analyze my Github activity to update my coworkers."
- RcouF1uZ4gsC 3y ago
  > Honestly, I just don't want to live in a world where 10 years from now my coworkers are able to write a prompt "I'm taking a day off tomorrow without telling anyone so simulate me on Slack. Join daily standup at 9am using an undetectable deep fake. Answer the questions in the style of everyone else. Analyze my Github activity to update my coworkers." Honestly, that world sounds amazing. Imagine how productive you could be at programming if you could say: "I'm going to be doing some deep thinking and coding on a hard problem so simulate me on Slack. Join daily standup at 9am using an undetectable deep fake. Answer the questions in the style of everyone else. Analyze my Github activity to update my coworkers."
  - cj 3y ago
    Point taken. But the point I was trying to make is that deception isn’t cool. AI lowers the bar for deception.

cj 3y ago

I watched Simulant last night (mediocre movie about human-like AI robots taking over the world). One of the "laws" in the fake world in the movie was something like "AI must only be used when it's being supervised and doing things at the direction of a human" I thought this was actually an interesting way to think about it. E.g. If it becomes possible to tell ChatGPT to "spin up a website in the format of NYTimes.com and post 15 new articles relating to recent events each day. publish articles without human review". I think prompts like would really degrade the internet if we also pair it with prompts like "Create twitter accounts, fake engagement for 6 months or until you reach 5000 followers, then start promoting my NY Times clone using these accounts without getting banned from Twitter" That sort of prompt 1) performs an initial action, which is fine, but 2) also creates a repeating action that continues the AI's use into the future in an unsupervised manner and in a way that its output is used verbatim unreviewed by a human. I think this whole AI ban discussion needs to be a lot more nuanced. We can't just throw "freedom of speech" at the argument and call it a day. Honestly, I just don't want to live in a world where 10 years from now my coworkers are able to write a prompt "I'm taking a day off tomorrow without telling anyone so simulate me on Slack. Join daily standup at 9am using an undetectable deep fake. Answer the questions in the style of everyone else. Analyze my Github activity to update my coworkers."

RcouF1uZ4gsC 3y ago
> Honestly, I just don't want to live in a world where 10 years from now my coworkers are able to write a prompt "I'm taking a day off tomorrow without telling anyone so simulate me on Slack. Join daily standup at 9am using an undetectable deep fake. Answer the questions in the style of everyone else. Analyze my Github activity to update my coworkers." Honestly, that world sounds amazing. Imagine how productive you could be at programming if you could say: "I'm going to be doing some deep thinking and coding on a hard problem so simulate me on Slack. Join daily standup at 9am using an undetectable deep fake. Answer the questions in the style of everyone else. Analyze my Github activity to update my coworkers."
- cj 3y ago
  Point taken. But the point I was trying to make is that deception isn’t cool. AI lowers the bar for deception.