3 ms·
Fair but my point is simply, if a gun kills a person it's functioning as intended, but you can't say the same about a chat bot.
by pton_xd 5mo ago
Fair but my point is simply, if a gun kills a person it's functioning as intended, but you can't say the same about a chat bot.
- JumpCrisscross 5mo ago> if a gun kills a person it's functioning as intended, but you can't say the same for a chat bot Of course you can. AI has been deployed in multiple military campaigns.
- dugidugout 5mo ago> a chat bot We are clearly not discussing deployments in military campaigns.The suit in question is specifically regarding "ChatGPT" used conversationally.
- JumpCrisscross 5mo ago> suit in question is specifically regarding "ChatGPT" used conversationally The suit in question doesn't involve any guns. We're obviously having a broader discussion.
- dugidugout 5mo agoRegarding guns and chat bots. You've said as much and the origin of the discussion says as much. Where does anyone suggest they are referring to use of LLMs in military deployments other than you?
- vorticalbox 5mo agoTheir job is to generate text if that text is good or bad they are functioning as intended.
- chrisco255 5mo agoA gun doesn't kill a person without being driven to action by a human. There are numerous alternative weapons to use, like using a candlestick in the conservatory or a rope in the lead pipe in the study for example.
- bob1029 5mo ago> A gun doesn't kill a person without being driven to action by a human. See: p320 uncommanded discharge controversy.