ChatGPT should be banned?

[McConnaughay]

ChatGPT is an artificial intelligence chatbot.

I don't think its dangerous. Its just for fun.

For now. I think a lot of the concern about ChatGPT, Deep Fakes, and A.I. imagery is the ramifications it could have overall. Will voice actors lose their jobs if A.I. voices can replace them? Will graphic artists lose their jobs? Writers? And then, on an even more major level, if Deep Fakes become proper replicas of reality, what will the ramifications for that be? If everything can be real, nothing can be.

 

[~ True Legend ~]

Will voice actors lose their jobs if A.I. voices can replace them?

No, I think voice actors will only lose the job of speaking during their acting, sparking even more controversy, like how there exists controversy with respect to singers playing recordings while merely miming the lyrics in performances. 😂

 

[Moonface]

No, but there should be a way to know if a written work used an AI program or not, especially when it comes to academia. Nobody should be able to pass off the work of an AI as entirely their own because it isn't, just as it wouldn't be if you handed someone a page of notes and bullet points and got them to write a paper for you.

 

[~ True Legend ~]

No, but there should be a way to know if a written work used an AI program or not, especially when it comes to academia.

You can already do that. Enter text into chatGPT and it will tell you if it's AI- generated or not. I wonder how accurate it will be though, as AI becomes ever-increasingly human-like

 

[DrLeftover]

AI should be understood, and controlled, but you can't ban an idea nor stop development of new technology based on those ideas.

 

[~ True Legend ~]

AI should be understood, and controlled, but you can't ban an idea nor stop development of new technology based on those ideas.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-65102210

Numerous concerns have been raised.

As AI continues developing rapidly, questions have been raised about the future risks it could pose to people's privacy, their human rights or their safety.

There is concern that AI can display biases against particular groups if trained on large datasets scraped from the internet which can include racist, sexist and other undesirable material.

AI could also be used to create and spread misinformation.

There are plans to regulate AI in various countries .

In the EU, the European Commission has published proposals for regulations titled the Artificial Intelligence Act which would have a much broader scope than China's enacted regulation.

They include "grading" AI products according to how potentially harmful they might be and staggering regulation accordingly. So for example an email spam filter would be more lightly regulated than something designed to diagnose a medical conditions - and some AI uses, such as social grading by governments, would be prohibited altogether.

China, for example, has taken the lead in moving AI regulations past the proposal stage with rules that mandate companies notify users when an AI algorithm is playing a role.

"Numerous countries globally are developing or passing specific laws to address perceived AI risks - including algorithmic rules passed in China or the USA," continued Mr Elliott.

I don't think the plans for the UK regulations are clear enough.

Instead of giving responsibility for AI governance to a new single regulator, the government wants existing regulators - such as the Health and Safety Executive, Equality and Human Rights Commission and Competition and Markets Authority - to come up with their own approaches that suit the way AI is actually being used in their sectors.

These regulators will be using existing laws rather than being given new powers.

Michael Birtwistle, associate director from the Ada Lovelace Institute, carries out independent research, and said he welcomed the idea of regulation but warned about "significant gaps" in the UK's approach which could leave harms unaddressed.

"Initially, the proposals in the white paper will lack any statutory footing. This means no new legal obligations on regulators, developers or users of AI systems, with the prospect of only a minimal duty on regulators in future.

"The UK will also struggle to effectively regulate different uses of AI across sectors without substantial investment in its existing regulators," he said.

 

[koop2]

No, it's an incredible tool.

 

[Draconis]

I say keep it going if I can use it to increase my credit score. LOL

 

[~ True Legend ~]

I say keep it going if I can use it to increase my credit score. LOL

Your credit score? how? LOL

 

[Draconis]

 

[Moonface]

You can already do that. Enter text into chatGPT and it will tell you if it's AI- generated or not. I wonder how accurate it will be though, as AI becomes ever-increasingly human-like

Examples I've seen of AI-checking haven't looked promising. I've already seen a few examples of people writing their own essays but checkers flagging them as AI-generated. If ChatGPT or other AI-writing programs get good enough to be on par to genuinely written content I don't know how it could ever be checked accurately either.

 

[Nebulous]

For now. I think a lot of the concern about ChatGPT, Deep Fakes, and A.I. imagery is the ramifications it could have overall. Will voice actors lose their jobs if A.I. voices can replace them? Will graphic artists lose their jobs? Writers? And then, on an even more major level, if Deep Fakes become proper replicas of reality, what will the ramifications for that be? If everything can be real, nothing can be.

Indeed, the art world will suffer incredibly if computers can do it all better than we can.