3 ms·

Another step to make users dumb and blindly trusting of their regulators. I don't opose labeling AI content, I opose mandating it and giving users the false con

Another step to make users dumb and blindly trusting of their regulators. I don't opose labeling AI content, I opose mandating it and giving users the false confidence that something without label is legit.

HatchedLake721 2mo ago
Let’s stop labeling cigarettes are bad, because people will start smoking cigars and think they’re safe. Unlabeled doesn’t mean safe or legit.
- abc123abc123 2mo ago
  Let's start labling everything. Let us label every cigarette individually, every single drinking glass, every single nail. No, people still smoke, drink and fornicate, despite all the labels. At some point, we should just let Brother Darwin sort out the thinking ones from the non-thinking ones, because at a too aggressive level of protection, society will stop working, and people will regress to children.
  - DarkNova6 2mo ago
    The non thinking ones have voting power too and they will burn this shithole down because they think some powerful people in nice suits act on good faith and should be given all the decisionmaking and resources. This way of thinking is a very efficient way of destroying your culture and civilisation.
  - blackbear_ 2mo ago
    Labels did work in reducing harmful behaviors: > Participants drew on a range of risk discourses in framing their abstention or moderate drinking along the lines of health, wellness, wisdom and productivity. They reiterated social constructions of heavy or regular alcohol use as irresponsible, threatening and potentially addictive. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/dar.13709 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/dar.13709
_puk 2mo ago
You suggesting the inverse? Consciously labelling something as genuine / non AI incorrectly is fraud. "Forgetting" to add an AI label is an error of omission. Feels like the former is far more punishable than the latter.
- PowerElectronix 2mo ago
  I mean that you can disinform people with non-AI content that wouldn't be labelled and people would assign more credibility to it because it lacks the AI label.
rsynnott 2mo ago
If I buy a bottle of, say, white spirits, there’s a warning on it that it’s poison and dangerously flammable. Because that’s the law. Now, there’s nothing _really_ stopping an unscrupulous manufacturer from making a bottle without those warnings. But on balance it still feels preferable to force manufacturers to do it.
- PowerElectronix 2mo ago
  On that same example, if for whatever reason (evil company, company that isn't up to date with regulations, misprints) you get a bottle of that without any label. Would you blindly trust that yoi can toss it to a fire or mix it in your coffee? The point I try to make is that consumers should be educated more than being told what to think about a product by looking at a label, especially when companies are way nimbler than regulators and will make aure labels are as useless as they can get.

HatchedLake721 2mo ago

Let’s stop labeling cigarettes are bad, because people will start smoking cigars and think they’re safe. Unlabeled doesn’t mean safe or legit.

abc123abc123 2mo ago
Let's start labling everything. Let us label every cigarette individually, every single drinking glass, every single nail. No, people still smoke, drink and fornicate, despite all the labels. At some point, we should just let Brother Darwin sort out the thinking ones from the non-thinking ones, because at a too aggressive level of protection, society will stop working, and people will regress to children.
- DarkNova6 2mo ago
  The non thinking ones have voting power too and they will burn this shithole down because they think some powerful people in nice suits act on good faith and should be given all the decisionmaking and resources. This way of thinking is a very efficient way of destroying your culture and civilisation.
- blackbear_ 2mo ago
  Labels did work in reducing harmful behaviors: > Participants drew on a range of risk discourses in framing their abstention or moderate drinking along the lines of health, wellness, wisdom and productivity. They reiterated social constructions of heavy or regular alcohol use as irresponsible, threatening and potentially addictive. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/dar.13709 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/dar.13709

_puk 2mo ago

You suggesting the inverse? Consciously labelling something as genuine / non AI incorrectly is fraud. "Forgetting" to add an AI label is an error of omission. Feels like the former is far more punishable than the latter.

PowerElectronix 2mo ago
I mean that you can disinform people with non-AI content that wouldn't be labelled and people would assign more credibility to it because it lacks the AI label.

rsynnott 2mo ago

If I buy a bottle of, say, white spirits, there’s a warning on it that it’s poison and dangerously flammable. Because that’s the law. Now, there’s nothing _really_ stopping an unscrupulous manufacturer from making a bottle without those warnings. But on balance it still feels preferable to force manufacturers to do it.

PowerElectronix 2mo ago
On that same example, if for whatever reason (evil company, company that isn't up to date with regulations, misprints) you get a bottle of that without any label. Would you blindly trust that yoi can toss it to a fire or mix it in your coffee? The point I try to make is that consumers should be educated more than being told what to think about a product by looking at a label, especially when companies are way nimbler than regulators and will make aure labels are as useless as they can get.