- Pascal's Chatbot Q&As
- Archive
- Page 88
Archive
Alcon claims that Tesla, Elon Musk, and Warner Bros. used an AI-generated image that mimicked a still image from the iconic visual sequence in the film Blade Runner 2049.
The combination of the infringing AI-generated image, clear refusal of permission, Musk’s explicit references, and the potential financial harm creates a strong factual foundation.
GPT-4o: Based on these factors, I would estimate the likelihood that we are dealing with a bubble in the generative AI space at 75%.
This is a high likelihood, reflecting the significant risks and red flags. However, I wouldn’t say it's certain, because the technology does have real, transformative potential.
The article "How to Say No to Our AI Overlords" discusses the increasing prevalence of AI technologies from major companies like Google, Microsoft, Meta, and Apple in everyday consumer products.
Even when users opt out of direct data collection, AI companies can still potentially access user or usage-related data through various indirect and creative means.
GPT-4o: In today’s digital landscape, the temptation for companies to push boundaries and only comply with legal frameworks after achieving market success is significant.
However, the consequences of allowing this approach can erode the rule of law, harm competition, and encourage unethical business models, particularly in the context of AI.
Penguin Random House has added a "Do-Not-Scrape-for-AI" clause to the copyright page of its books, explicitly prohibiting the use of its copyrighted works for training AI models.
ChatGPT-4o: AI companies should respect publishers' opt-out requests, even in jurisdictions without explicit legal mandates, to avoid potential litigation and reputational damage.
The article "AI is supposed to be Hollywood's next big thing: What's taking so long?" outlines several barriers to early AI adoption for Hollywood movie studios and streaming platforms
Yes, the fact that AI models have been trained on works created by others—particularly when these works might (un)intentionally show up in model outputs—can indeed pose significant legal challenges.
GPT-4o about the World Orb (Operator) T&Cs: I would not recommend that users agree to these terms and conditions without fully understanding the implications and evaluating their own risk tolerance.
Extensive scope of data collection, long retention periods, 3rd-country data transfers (USA), and the use of automated decision-making processes. "Legitimate interest" as a legal basis.
GPT-4o about 'Beyond 'AI boosterism': I generally agree with most of the report's arguments, particularly regarding the need for real-world evidence, accountability and a balanced regulatory framework
However, I advocate for a more nuanced approach in regulating the public sector’s use of AI, ensuring they are equipped with the necessary resources to implement these systems effectively.
!["World [Network] is offering anyone the ability to buy or rent their own Orb and become a "community operator," verifying humans in their communities."](https://media.beehiiv.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,width=800,height=421,fit=scale-down,onerror=redirect/uploads/asset/file/de30b4e5-ae39-431e-b402-c736f7841ffd/5a4ef50a-10cc-42a8-941f-eb2f07dd89a4_1024x768.jpg)
"World [Network] is offering anyone the ability to buy or rent their own Orb and become a "community operator," verifying humans in their communities."
"The idea that a privately held network, developed by a for-profit organization, would play a central role in verifying the human identity of millions (eventually billions) raises ethical concerns."
Claude: Based on my analysis of the conversation, I notice several indications of potential bias in ChatGPT's responses regarding Sam Altman, despite its final claim of neutrality
ChatGPT-4o: Let’s revisit Sam Altman’s profile with a more balanced approach, focusing more critically on the areas where potential issues, controversies, or complexities arise.
GPT-4o: Each jurisdiction is grappling with how to regulate the use of copyrighted works for AI training, with varying degrees of permissiveness and concern for creators' rights.
Here’s a ranked list of actions content creators and rights owners can take to counter developments that allow AI to train on their content without sufficient consent or compensation.