That was definitely inappropriate, but it would still have been inappropriate if it was made up by a human rather than by an AI. I think it’s useful to distribute between bad things that happen to be done by an AI and things that are bad specifically because they are done by an AI. How would you feel about an AI that didn’t lie or deceive but also didn’t announce itself as an AI?
It could, if it annoumced itself as such.
Instead it pretended to be a rape victim and offered “its own experience”.
ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works 1 week ago
sinceasdf@lemmy.world 1 week ago
I think when posting on a forum/message board it’s assumed you’re talking to other people, so AI should always announce itself as such. That’s probably a pipe dream though.
If anyone wants to specifically get an AI perspective they can go to an AI directly. They might add useful context to people’s forum conversations, but there should be a prioritization of actual human experiences there.
FauxLiving@lemmy.world 1 week ago
I think when posting on a forum/message board it’s assumed you’re talking to other people
That would have been a good position to take in the early days of the Internet, it is a very naive assumption to make now. Even in the 2010s actors with a large amount of resources (state intelligence agencies, advertisers, etc) could hire human beings from low wage English speaking countries to generate fake content online.
LLMs have only made this cheaper, to the point where I assume that most of the commenters on political topics are likely bots.
sinceasdf@lemmy.world 1 week ago
For sure, thus why I said it’s a pipe dream. We can dream though, maybe we will figure out some kind of solution one day.
Fleur_@aussie.zone 1 week ago
Blaming a language model for lying is like charging a deer with jaywalking.
shneancy@lemmy.world 1 week ago
the researchers said all AI posts were approved by a human before posting, it was their choice how many lies to include
tribut@infosec.pub 1 week ago
Nobody is blaming the AI model. We are blaming the researchers and users of AI, which is kind of the point.
echolalia@lemmy.ml 1 week ago
Which, in an ideal world, is why AI generated comments should be labeled.
I always break when I see a deer at the side of the road.
(Yes people can lie on the Internet. If you funded an army of propagandists to convince people by any means necessary I think you would find it expensive. People generally find lying like this to feel bad. It would take a mental toll. With AI, this looks possible for cheaper.)
Rolive@discuss.tchncs.de 1 week ago
I’m glad Google still labels the AI overview in search results so I know to scroll further for actually useful information.
FauxLiving@lemmy.world 1 week ago
They label ‘AI’ only the LLM generated content.
All of Google’s search algorithims are “AI” (i.e. Machine Learning), it’s what made them so effective when they first appeared on the scene. They just use their algorithms and a massive amount of data about you (way more than in your comment history) to target you for advertising, including political advertising.
If you don’t want AI generated content then you shouldn’t use Google, it is entirely made up of machine learning who’s sole goal is to match you with people who want to buy access to your views.