Oh okay, I see what you are saying now. Yes, I talked about that in the second post as well.
Yes, if we throw enough fake everything everywhere then everyone will be safe from anything. And if everyone is already covered in mud no one can be cancelled anymore. Hard to live in that world though and would require big changes, universal ID, etc.
Really I was thinking more about short term before the massive avalanche of media - both real and fake - that's about to hit buries everything. I don't know how long we have before that, maybe not even a year? Before that big storm hits people might dig up some pretty big skeletons is what I'm saying. Every prominent person online already has enough training data already in the system right now to make an attempt to find anything from their past.
If by counter you mean detection it's only effective about 26% of the time, and gives false positives 9% of the time.
https://twitter.com/emollick/status/1625159122797891584
Yes, private keys/hard ID is a big concern for a certain part of the internet right now.
Hello, I was hesitant to post this so I asked permission first. If mods feel it shouldn't be here please remove it and I will be fine with that. Essentially it's just me arguing with ChatGPT. I enjoy the format, but I can't trust anything it says obviously. So I would appreciate it if people here would tear down my (and it's) argument if it's wrong. I have no technical background so there is probably a huge hole in the middle of it somewhere. Also, of course, it's potentially just a huge hallucinatory sci-fi story we happily told each other with no basis in reality.
I will explain about V. She is a bot to try... (read 405 more words →)
Hello, long time reader all the way back to Overcoming Bias. I've always liked this community and loved reading posts here. I have never posted before and only just created this account a few months ago shorty after I used ChatGPT in November.
"I volunteer to be one of those weirdos who panic when everyone else is calm with some hope it could trigger a respectability cascade."
From another weirdo who really did not really want to work up the rigor to post, thank you.
The counterargument generally appears to be that, yes, Sydney was an advancement, but it's an advancement broadly in line with predictions, so there is no real reason to panic. I don't work in CS or AI. I'm a layman. I've been interested in the subject for a long time though and I try to at least keep up with reading at a blog level. Maybe the highest value contribution to the discussion... (read 384 more words →)