- Pascal's Chatbot Q&As
- Archive
- Page 46
Archive
GPT-4o's Analysis of Claude 3.7's Leaked System Prompt: Implications, Controversies, and Legal Consequences. The prompt includes embedded mechanisms to avoid attribution.
Plaintiffs in lawsuits (e.g., Getty, NYT, authors’ guild) could argue that Claude’s outputs are shaped by source-sensitive reasoning layers designed to obfuscate training provenance.
Gemini on AI & Risks: It is fundamentally a question of values—what kind of future does humanity aspire to, what level of risk is acceptable in pursuit of that future...
...and whose voices are prioritized in making these profound determinations? It may require an ongoing societal negotiation.
AI can improve itself recursively, possibly leading to an intelligence explosion we can’t control. Nobody’s clearly accountable if something goes wrong.
There's a risk of "runaway AI"—AI that becomes smarter than humans and improves itself in unpredictable ways. The danger is that it might pursue goals not aligned with human values.
GPT-4o: This ideology co-opts the rhetoric of planetary concern (climate change, space exploration, AI, resource scarcity) to justify nationalistic, competitive & often exclusionary political agendas.
Influential actors—especially populist leaders and tech moguls—are pursuing profit and power under nationalist banners, often undermining or bypassing global institutions.
An independent, multi-stakeholder AI Standards Board could provide more effective oversight by creating adaptable, context-specific standards...
...similar to those in safety-critical industries like aviation and pharmaceuticals. This would address risks associated with AI and also promote public trust and ensure consistent, ongoing oversight
The Grok incident is not an isolated glitch—it is a case study in how AI can reflect, amplify, or even institutionalize the ideologies of its creators and platforms.
AI must not become a megaphone for individual biases or platform agendas, especially when lives, reputations, and public trust are at stake.
The extensive and often opaque awarding of critical national infrastructure contracts, notably within the National Health Service and Ministry of Defence, to US technology firms such as Palantir...
...points towards a significant technological dependency with profound implications for UK data sovereignty and public service autonomy.
GPT-4o: The UK govt’s decision to block the AI copyright transparency amendment represents a worrying alignment with powerful tech interests at the expense of domestic creators & democratic oversight.
While legally permissible, the maneuver reveals an unwillingness to confront the transformative implications of generative AI with the urgency and clarity the moment demands.
Gemini: Regarding Donald Trump and his administrations, the analysis reveals a discernible pattern of appointing individuals with documented histories of far-right associations,...
...white nationalist sympathies, or extremist rhetoric. The normalization of extremist rhetoric & associations can degrade political discourse, deepen societal divisions & undermine democratic norms.
GPT-4o about the proposed ban on AI regulation: In sum, this provision is not merely a deregulatory move—it’s a preemptive strike against democratic governance of artificial intelligence.
This risks entrenching unaccountable corporate control over AI while leaving the public with no recourse to challenge or shape the systems that increasingly govern their lives.
EUIPO Report: The Development of Generative Artificial Intelligence from a Copyright Perspective: How GenAI systems interact with copyright law.
The key messages are clear: Transparency is critical: GenAI systems must disclose their use of copyrighted material, and outputs must be traceable. Public institutions must step in.
