- Pascal's Chatbot Q&As
- Archive
- Page 152
Archive
Claude: The common thread is recognizing innovation's inevitable tensions with public interest concerns. Reasonable guardrails forged through collaborative discussion tend to serve all parties better
...in the long run compared to a tech free-for-all or stringent bans arising only post-crisis. The win-win approach builds public trust
The Imperative of Tangible Thresholds in AI Governance - by ChatGPT-4. The future of AI should not be shaped solely by those who stand to profit from it
Concrete, mathematical thresholds are vital. We need defined metrics for intervention. Without such thresholds, we risk normalizing collateral damage in the name of progress
ChatGPT-4's analysis of the Podcast: "Exploring the Intersection of AI and Intellectual Property: A Conversation with Kayleigh Nauman, UKās North American IP AttacheĢ"
Big Tech companies are described as exploiting loopholes in regulations. When the EU attempts to regulate US Big Tech, these companies reportedly find and utilize loopholes in the new regulations
Asking AI services: Should AI makers stop doing this or at least discuss it with the artists and creators who feel violated by what has happened already thus far?
Bard: When an AI product copies someone's style it is essentially invading the artist's personal space. The artist's work is no longer their own; This can be a very unsettling and intrusive experience
Possible factors contributing to the temporary ousting of Sam Altman by OpenAIās previous Board - by Bing Chat
Claude: As with any AI analysis, results are highly dependent on the inputs as well as the training of the system. But this seems like a thoughtful early attempt to make sense of the factors at play











