Live data from Hacker News

Keep your AI claims in check

ftc.gov

21–30 of 308 posts

Re: Keep your AI claims in check

#21
post #14
post #3

[flagged]

Do "IF-THEN" statements count as AI? Do rules-based expert systems count?

I imagine we'll be seeing a few cases setting that precedent in the next 10 years, and it's likely that the kind of "aha I said finger, a thumb isn't a finger, so I win" argument favoured by sovereign citizens, 5-year-olds and techbros who think they're smarter than everyone else will go over as well as it usually does.

Re: Keep your AI claims in check

#22
post #13

Are you aware of the risks? You need to know about the reasonably foreseeable risks and impact of your AI product before putting it on the market. If something goes wrong – maybe it fails or yields biased results – you can’t just blame a third-party developer of the technology. And you can’t say you’re not responsible because that technology is a “black box” you can’t understand or didn’t know how to test. I'm remind…

Ignorance of your "black box" excuses not

Re: Keep your AI claims in check

#23
This is fascinating, it’s a bit refreshing to see plain text for normal people. I can’t be the only person with extreme anxiety reading Sam Altman’s twitter and wondering if my career choice was the wrong one some days. It would be nice to see if this FTC post tamps down that hype machine?

Re: Keep your AI claims in check

#25
post #13

Are you aware of the risks? You need to know about the reasonably foreseeable risks and impact of your AI product before putting it on the market. If something goes wrong – maybe it fails or yields biased results – you can’t just blame a third-party developer of the technology. And you can’t say you’re not responsible because that technology is a “black box” you can’t understand or didn’t know how to test. I'm remind…

[dead]

Re: Keep your AI claims in check

#26
> If something goes wrong – maybe it fails or yields biased results – you can’t just blame a third-party developer of the technology.

Implicit shoutout to all the “slap a front end on ChatGPT” products out there.

Re: Keep your AI claims in check

#27
post #4

wow, i would not have imagined a gov't agency to be agile enough to release something like this. i'm kind of impressed. here's to hoping this isn't just all bark and there's some actual teeth to his.

I had the same thought!

Then, my next thought was:

Who (in industry) wrote this? (and got FTC to publish it? wanting to drive some agenda forward).

Re: Keep your AI claims in check

#28
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its incredible. The language is not bureaucratic, its elegant, precise, and clear. Like written by a passionate person who cares about the topic, rather than a government drone.

Perhaps a little too elegant, precise, and clear... wouldn't it be deliciously ironic if this blog was written by chatgpt?

ChatGPT is sometimes precise and clear, but I've yet to see any writing come out of it that I would describe as elegant. It tends toward the mediocre-college-essay end of the writing quality spectrum.

Re: Keep your AI claims in check

#29
post #17
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do "IF-THEN" statements count as AI? Do rules-based expert systems count?

The entire post was about keeping AI claims in check. Whether you market your IF-THEN statements or rules-based expert systems as AIs is what matters.

But if those things are considered AI then why would it matters if you market them as AI?

Re: Keep your AI claims in check

#30
post #4

wow, i would not have imagined a gov't agency to be agile enough to release something like this. i'm kind of impressed. here's to hoping this isn't just all bark and there's some actual teeth to his.

Its incredible. The language is not bureaucratic, its elegant, precise, and clear. Like written by a passionate person who cares about the topic, rather than a government drone.

Slightly obnoxious too … specially the last sentence.
Post reply on HN