Word of CAUTION Re: #ChatGPT

1. 92

   Kenna McHughposted 20 months ago

   High-end marketing friend shared this with me. What do you think? #AI generated marketing and content...
   
   If you don’t fully humanize it, you will be fully crushed by it. 
   
   Technology is quickly evolving and counterGPT or counterAI is rolling out across all algorithms, school systems, government, etc… you didn’t think they would figure it out? Of course they would. It’s a threat to almost every area of society. 
   
   Want to know what I’m talking about?
   
   Google ZERO GPT. This technology is able to detect AI generated content with up to 98% accuracy and you know what’s happening with these results? The algorithms across social media, google and everywhere will make your content disappear from the face of the internet earth.  I’m already seeing marketing results come crashing down of AI generated marketing campaigns and content. 
   
   Does that mean you shouldn’t use the power of AI? Absolutely not. That would be plain stupidity since it does make you inevitably more efficient. The key is…
   
   THOROUGHLY HUMANIZING YOUR AI CONTENT.

   replyreport
   1. 95

      jansharesposted 20 months agoin reply to this

      Good to see this, Kenna. But does this more specifically mean that AI should be used for research and formatting purposes only? Because "thoroughly humanizing your AI content" sounds like an oxymoron, doesn't it?
      
      By the way, Paul Goodman opened this discussion in his post several weeks ago by informing us that his content, generated with the assistance of AI, had been detected by HP to his surprise. Has anyone seen him lately?

      replyreport
      1. 92

         Kenna McHughposted 20 months agoin reply to this

         Jan, I agree it does sound like an oxymoron. I use AI for research (though carefully because it's not always accurate) and formatting purposes.
         I don't think AI can ever be humanized unless a writer gets in there and cleans it up.
         I remember Paul's post. I did see him respond to one of Eugene's postings recently.

         replyreport
      2. 73

         Miebakagh57posted 20 months agoin reply to this

         Good to ask. I'll not be surprised if he jump out of his rabbit hole, if ever he builds one?!                                 That Chat GPT AI generated content he wrote is digging a down-ward slopping steps for him lately. Sorry PaulGoodman.                                    I take it that this discussion will smoke him out? Thank you.

         replyreport
   2. 85

      Jan Stepanposted 20 months agoin reply to this

      I am one of those who refuse to use AI and think it should be banned in most industries, except research. AI may become valuable to us in the future if/when we have a well-functioning economic system and an adequately sustainable labor market. In today's world – AI is only worsening the problems we face.

      replyreport
2. 73

   Miebakagh57posted 20 months ago

   Kenna, the thing is if a writer or a firm wants to apply AI in whatsoever form, that's they business.                                   Nowadays, using turnitin technology system, to detect plagiarism and AI generated content is becoming very common.                                       Seriously, at 98% detection ratd, that tell someboay like me to be content to use the human mind.

   replyreport
   1. 92

      Kenna McHughposted 20 months agoin reply to this

      I hear you! I had a client ask me to "clean up" AI content. It was a mess.

      replyreport
3. 96

   Rupert Taylorposted 20 months ago

   In the field of endeavour in which we toil, I would like to see AI referred to as artificial writing (AW), because that's what it is.
   
   The examples of AW that I've seen are dull and lifeless; they convey information but without character or soul. AW cannot express emotion or humour - yet. It cannot make disparate connections the way the human mind can. AW reads like the product of an automaton, which is what it is.
   
   I would never use AW for research or formatting because the artificial nature of those skills would seep through into the final product. Writing, as with painting, music, and other arts, will always come from the creative processes of the human mind.

   replyreport
   1. 92

      Kenna McHughposted 20 months agoin reply to this

      Well written, Rupert. I shared this with others.

      replyreport
   2. 85

      Jan Stepanposted 20 months agoin reply to this

      As Kenna said, well put. Expressing emotions is something I don't think an AI will ever be capable of.

      replyreport
   3. 84

      bravewarriorposted 20 months agoin reply to this

      Very well said, Rupert!

      replyreport
4. 39

   Palmershadyposted 20 months ago

   I love this piece, especially the concluding parts. I don't use AI but am considering it. I Believe in the long run, AI addicts will have a lot to  deal with as a lot of platforms have become anti-AI

   replyreport
   1. 73

      Miebakagh57posted 20 months agoin reply to this

      Yes, and exactly.

      replyreport
5. 87

   Nell Roseposted 20 months ago

   I have used ai for pictures, but have never tried the writing one. I am curious about it, but would never use it for an article etc.

   replyreport
   1. 92

      Kenna McHughposted 20 months agoin reply to this

      Neil, How do you use it for pictures?

      replyreport
   2. 73

      Miebakagh57posted 20 months agoin reply to this

      Does it show-case pictures from a free photo sites, or free Creative Commons?

      replyreport
6. 82

   bhattucposted 20 months ago

   We have to use AI only as reference and not for reproducing or believing it fully.

   replyreport
   1. 92

      Kenna McHughposted 20 months agoin reply to this

      Good point!

      replyreport
7. 95

   ravirajan01posted 20 months ago

   We also need to consider that one of the loftier aims of OpenAI is to improve the lives of people with disabilities. The programming communities(including myself) involved in OpenAI developments believe that all AI systems, including ChatGPT, would facilitate easier access to information across all formats and make things accessible for people with disabilities whose employment rate is much lower than abled people.
   
   And so far, the results have helped.According to the human resources company Adecco's 2022 report, 6 out of 10 disabled people have benefitted by various AI technologies, and their employability has also improved.
   
   So my take is AI should not be banned but used judiciously on a case-to-case basis. We need to think of the larger picture. Yes, the indiscriminate use of AI for creating content or malicious purposes should be banned.

   replyreport
   1. 92

      Kenna McHughposted 20 months agoin reply to this

      Rav, This is an interesting report, though I am sometimes cautious when studies say it's supposed to help so and so the underprivileged. Then saying, therefore, we need to support this program.

      replyreport
   2. 95

      jansharesposted 20 months agoin reply to this

      Thanks for sharing this, Ravi. Good points.

      replyreport
      1. 95

         ravirajan01posted 20 months agoin reply to this

         Thanks Janie.

         replyreport
8. 73

   Miebakagh57posted 20 months ago

   Kenna, yes, I heard you loud and clear too. A 'mess' indeed.                                    But I'm sorry for the typo I made. Being human, it's becoming so regular after cross checking mistakes for correction.

   replyreport
9. 95

   ravirajan01posted 20 months ago

   Yes, Kenna agree with your point that we need to be cautious. But as with any other software, AI has its advantages and disadvantages. And I strongly believe that once the software becomes mature enough and legal, commercial, political, and human awareness strengthens around its usage, we can safely harness its power to better human lives.
   
   We are still in a nascent stage, so we have some way to go.

   replyreport
   1. 92

      Kenna McHughposted 20 months agoin reply to this

      Yes. I hear you. I see your point. I humbly caution because past endeavors discussed infancy and more research to fine-tune progress. We ended up with a Welfare system, overmedicated populous and underdeveloped countries starving and dying of disease. All in the name of helping the unfortunate.

      replyreport