2 ms·

Its not really useful unless you're a highschool student or something. And even that's bad enough. There are definitely use cases but it will probably take like

Its not really useful unless you're a highschool student or something. And even that's bad enough. There are definitely use cases but it will probably take like a decade or so to integrate it properly into industrial processes, and even then it will probably be limited and used in very strange ways you couldn't possibly imagine today. Like, someone is going to come up with something really fucking weird that saves a lot of time on some ultra-specific process and you won't even notice it. Meanwhile, people will expect work emails to be written with more personal expression or else they'll think an AI wrote it (I already know some people who got in trouble for using AI to write important emails and were then threatened with lawsuits for language in those emails that they themselves, of course, did not read).

eru 2y ago
> (I already know some people who got in trouble for using AI to write important emails and were then threatened with lawsuits for language in those emails that they themselves, of course, did not read). Of course, the solution to that is to have an AI that scans your email for problematic language.
- DiscourseFan 2y ago
  Its not that the language was "problematical," its just that the contents were more sensitive then I think they realized, and so they were held to account for the specificities of the language they used.
  - pjc50 2y ago
    Like the Air Canada case? https://www.bbc.com/travel/article/20240222-air-canada-chatbot-misinformation-what-travellers-should-know https://www.bbc.com/travel/article/20240222-air-canada-chatb... You are potentially liable for the contents of your work emails. This includes if you put a stupid disclaimer at the bottom. People have gone to jail over the contents of chat. It's one thing to take notes on a criminal conspiracy and another thing to have the AI make one up and drop you in it because you didn't read the email it sent.
    - DiscourseFan 2y ago
      Obviously I can't talk specifics, but no it wasn't that stupid. More like general negligence on their part.
  - eru 2y ago
    Well, just use an AI that scans for that problem, then. (I'm not entirely serious, but also not entirely joking. Looking for these kinds of red flags is probably more within the ability of contemporary systems than reliably writing prose.)

eru 2y ago

> (I already know some people who got in trouble for using AI to write important emails and were then threatened with lawsuits for language in those emails that they themselves, of course, did not read). Of course, the solution to that is to have an AI that scans your email for problematic language.

DiscourseFan 2y ago
Its not that the language was "problematical," its just that the contents were more sensitive then I think they realized, and so they were held to account for the specificities of the language they used.
- pjc50 2y ago
  Like the Air Canada case? https://www.bbc.com/travel/article/20240222-air-canada-chatbot-misinformation-what-travellers-should-know https://www.bbc.com/travel/article/20240222-air-canada-chatb... You are potentially liable for the contents of your work emails. This includes if you put a stupid disclaimer at the bottom. People have gone to jail over the contents of chat. It's one thing to take notes on a criminal conspiracy and another thing to have the AI make one up and drop you in it because you didn't read the email it sent.
  - DiscourseFan 2y ago
    Obviously I can't talk specifics, but no it wasn't that stupid. More like general negligence on their part.
- eru 2y ago
  Well, just use an AI that scans for that problem, then. (I'm not entirely serious, but also not entirely joking. Looking for these kinds of red flags is probably more within the ability of contemporary systems than reliably writing prose.)