Interested in the intersections between policy, law and technology. Programmer, lawyer, civil servant, orthodox Marxist. Blind.
Interesado en la intersección entre la política, el derecho y la tecnología. Programador, abogado, funcionario, marxista ortodoxo. Ciego.
Interesting article, and I definitely agree I prefer clear instructions when those are possible.
I only have an objection. When it’s said that no matter how well chatbots behave, it’s bad design, and that they’re being used to substitute expensive people; well, expensive people’s interface is chatting too. So in that regard I’m not sure there’s a meaningful difference. Obviously there is if the chatbot is badly behaved, but the article says that it’s a problem even setting that aside.
This is why in spite of the periodic verraten-ing the PSOE does, it is still measurably better than the alternatives.
I’ve tried deep research from ChatGPT for legal issues. It’s almost right. But still requires significant human oversight. For example I asked it for a set of norms that govern an issue and some of them were out of date.
Wow, it’s like he chose those examples on purpose to make his argument as ridiculous as possible: open borders (except for all the people forbidden to leave), regular elections (except now they’re indefinitely postponed)…
What was it that did it for you, the hypocrisy, the lack of contact with reality, or the blood lust?