Should AI generated posts be banned or otherwise regulated?

@hilde45 + 1 - I guess 'AGR' stands for 'Audiogoner'? 

@ticat + 1 - 

AI has been incredibly useful for me in research about anything (it's a good starting point to begin followup research), photography (explaining how to do various things in Photoshop and cleaning up dust and scratches, and removing distractions that I do not want there - it saves an enormous amount of time from doing it manually. I often have to iteratively modify my prompts as I go along, but that's how it works - garbage in, garbage out equally applies to prompts.

It's also constantly improving at a very fast clip; new version of ChatGPT just came out last week with vastly improved image-generating abilities. I like to be able to think of something I'd like to see, wild though it may be, still or video, write prompts to try to achieve it, and see the results as I go along. 

I don't use it for writing emails or novels, though given certain input, I may want it to put it together graphically, and I will use it for help in creating logos or setting up web pages. 

People seem to either be against the whole concept or embrace it as a tool. I'm in the latter camp. 

@hilde45 

Not sure but I'm guessing AGR is AudioGon Response.

@kerrybh 

"so delicately made" thanks for that.

In my experience, AI has been mostly spot-on related to the sonic signature of audio equipment that I own, have owned, or have heard and am considering trying in my system.  However, like other things, it is simply a tool. I wouldn’t use any one platform to base buying decisions on, including audio reviews, manufacturer information, or these forums where much of what gets posted is a parade of whatever gear or cables that others own.  Occasionally, when my knowledge base or fact checks indicate that the AI answer is wrong, I call it out and receive a response like, "yes, you are correct..." and then a discussion including the correct answer.  If anything, I feel a little guilty using AI because of all the computing power and associated energy it sucks up.  I believe we are in a phase where promoters are trying to generate interest and new users before starting to somehow charge for it.  

80% of medical AI queries are factually wrong.

Please verify the validity of this statement and provide reliable sources for this disclaimer.

Some self-identified AGRs (AudioGoneRs) tend to scrutinize AI critically, but may apply less consistent standards when evaluating their own community’s claims, sometimes making assertions without clear justification.

Law Firms have fired lawyers who don’t verify the source of AI sites.

Lawyers may be fired for providing false evidence or malpractice, regardless of whether the source is AI or not. One cannot testify in court using AI-generated evidence. Simulated crashworthiness cannot be presented in court as evidence for crash investigations.

To be clear, I am not against AI use.  I am probably "medium" when it comes to AI use...I use it daily but not like some people I know. IMHO AI can also be over- and mis- used. 

To refine my question, what I am really getting at is the type of post where it is simply and only "Here is what ChatGPT says:" without any actual thoughts from the poster.  That's just running a search for someone. 

My point, to perhaps put it better, is that each post should have some human element or that is contrary to the point of a forum.