ChatGPT
-
I promise to create a very hostile environment for AI Development in 2024…
-
Follow-up:
A federal judge tossed a lawsuit and issued a $5,000 fine to the plaintiff's lawyers after they used ChatGPT to research court filings that cited six fake cases invented by the artificial intelligence tool made by OpenAI. …
… More embarrassingly for the lawyers, they are required to send letters to six real judges who were "falsely identified as the author of the fake" opinions cited in their legal filings. …$5,000 fine is likely too lenient considering the lawyers could likely have billed more than that with merely a day’s work.
-
-
@taiwan_girl said in ChatGPT:
https://www.laptopmag.com/news/wormgpt-chatgpts-evil-twin-should-have-us-all-deeply-concerned
Silly human race.
-
ChatGPT leans liberal, new research shows
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/08/16/chatgpt-ai-political-bias-research/
-
-
A young AI that isn’t a little liberal has no heart. A mature AI that isn’t conservative has no brain…
-
-
Imagine a future in which the majority of text on the internet was produced by ChatGPT et al - which is then fed into ChatGPT et al as training data.
What would this process converge to?
I'd suggest that some weird variant of the 2nd thermodynamic law implies that the chat bots will become more stupid with each iteration. They cannot produce text that contains new information or patterns that they don't already know. It's an endless loop of confirmation bias at work.
-
The interesting question is whether it leans liberal only because the data set on which it was trained leans liberal, or if there was some intentionality behind it.
The selection of which data to train it on was likely biased.
Not necessarily. There are plenty of other ways to introduce bias in an AI model.
-
... popular authors including John Grisham, Jonathan Franzen, George R.R. Martin, Jodi Picoult, and George Saunders joined the Authors Guild in suing OpenAI, alleging that training the company's large language models (LLMs) used to power AI tools like ChatGPT on pirated versions of their books violates copyright laws and is "systematic theft on a mass scale."
-
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2023/oct/02/tom-hanks-dental-ad-ai-version-fake
Tom Hanks says AI version of him used in dental plan ad without his consent
-
Let's pull this thread a bit further. We know the AI (deep fake) videos are here and will only get better, and they aren't going away. What if we also had AI-faked signatures on contracts that lie about the celebrity's contract to do the fake ad? Dangerous times we have entered.
-
Let's pull this thread a bit further. We know the AI (deep fake) videos are here and will only get better, and they aren't going away. What if we also had AI-faked signatures on contracts that lie about the celebrity's contract to do the fake ad? Dangerous times we have entered.
One solution is to insist on the contracting parties signing physical documents in blood. That way you get physical, biometric proofs right there.
-
-
-
That way you get physical, biometric proofs right there.
A while ago, I read about a company that was promoting pens that contained DNA within the ink to prove the signature was valid.
I believe that their original idea was to market it to people who were famous enough to sell their autographs or things like that.
-
@taiwan_girl said in ChatGPT:
That way you get physical, biometric proofs right there.
A while ago, I read about a company that was promoting pens that contained DNA within the ink to prove the signature was valid.
I believe that their original idea was to market it to people who were famous enough to sell their autographs or things like that.
Nathan Tardiff does the same thing with an $8 bottle. Has been for years. Each one has unique markers that don't break down over time.
He makes a red that literally binds to the celluloid cells of the paper. It's pretty damn impossible to remove the ink.
