171–180 of 254 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is AI-generated text speech?
It is when a human publishes it. Which is why they're also liable for it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It would make sense to have a more general law about accountability for the contents of news. If news is significantly misleading or plagiarizing, it shouldn’t matter if it is due to the use of AI or not, the human editorship should be liable in either case. This is a concept at least in some EU countries, that there has to always be one person responsible in terms of press law for what is being published.
That would bankrupt every news organisation in the USA.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or it'll end up like California cancer warnings: every news site will put the warning on, just in case, making it worthless.
Known by the state of cancer to cause California. I do think P65 warnings are pretty useful for the most part jokes aside
But this just my uninformed opinion, perhaps those that work in the health industry think differently.
Oregon kind of already has this they just don't enforce their laws.
Oregon and New York both are still trying to work their way up the 'rule of law' pyramid past the base level of stopping fetnanyl and meth heads from robbing convenience stores and parked cars. Every moment spent on enforcing AI disclaimers instead is an affront to the populace.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This bill would require a disclaimer on something published. That’s a freedom of speech issue They can publish all they want, they just have to label it clearly. I don’t see how that is a free speech issue.
Because compelled speech is an insult to free speech just as censored speech is.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Because no one believes these laws or bills or acts or whatever will be enforced. That’s because they can’t be. People assume they’ve already figured out how AI behaves and that they can just mandate specific "proper" ways to use it. The reality is that AI companies and users are going to keep refining these tools until they're indistinguishable from human work whenever they want them to be. Even if the models stil…
> the idea that you can just ban AI from certain settings is a fantasy because there’s no technical way to actually guarantee enforcement. By that token bans on illegal drugs are fantasy. Whereas in fact, enforcement doesn't need to be guaranteed to be effective. There may be little technical means to distinguish at the moment. But could that have something to do with lack of motivation? Let's see how many "AI" $$$ s…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or it'll end up like California cancer warnings: every news site will put the warning on, just in case, making it worthless.
… or the sesame seed labeling law that resulted in sesame seeds being added to everything. https://apnews.com/article/sesame-allergies-label-b28f8eb3dc...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That could do more harm than good. Like how California's bylaw about cancer warnings are useless because it makes it look like everything is known to the state of California to cause cancer, which in turn makes people just ignore and tune-out the warnings because they're not actually delivering signal-to-noise. This in turn harms people when they think, "How bad can tobacco be? Even my Aloe Vera plant has a warning l…
I bought a piece of wooden furniture some time ago. It came with a label saying that the state of California knows it to be a carcinogen. I live in Belgium. It was weird.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'm surprised to see so little coverage of AI legislation news here tbh. Because no one believes these laws or bills or acts or whatever will be enforced. But I actually believe they'll be. In the worst way possible: honest players will be punished disproportionally.
Or it'll end up like California cancer warnings: every news site will put the warning on, just in case, making it worthless.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Being able to fire employees is a great use of AI and should not be restricted. Can you elaborate on this?
There is less bias being able to have an AI measure who is being productive and who isn't. Getting signal from AI when measuring performance to know when to fire people will be a valuable signal.