3 ms·
At least part of it is that we do attribute malice or lack of care (or madness) to people who repeatedly do it, and treat their output differently in the future
by Groxx 5mo ago
At least part of it is that we do attribute malice or lack of care (or madness) to people who repeatedly do it, and treat their output differently in the future.
For some reason, some people repeatedly defend machines that constantly do the same thing, and claim we should give it the benefit of the doubt.
- timcobb 5mo agoWhy give anyone benefit of doubt when you're just trying to extract true information. If a person BSs you, you don't believe them in the future either. Giving BS the benefit of doubt isn't serving anyone. Giving intent benefit of doubt makes sense, but intent isn't important when it comes to technical information and lying about it
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- Groxx 5mo agoYes, that is my point about "AI" generated text. It's deep into "doubt by default, require evidence before bothering" territory. Hence I think it's strange to defend spending time on it by default.