Should AI generated posts be banned or otherwise regulated?

@mitch2 

I just read an article showing the people that are using AI the most are the higher level employees. They are typically overwhelmed with work, motivated and open to new ways of becoming more effective. So they worked their way up by hard work and are now becoming more productive... I’m guessing they will stay.

I’ve spent most of my career introducing new technology. There are good reasons to expect some differences... but it will also enable folks that adopt and use new tools to become incredibly productive. I have helped and seen many clerks and stock people go from $35K jobs doing mundane work to making well over $100K by being early adopters and then teaching and implementing new tech. Change affords great opportunities for those who grab on. '

Now alignment... that could be a showstopper. Fingers crossed on that one.  

I have helped and seen many clerks and stock people go from $35K jobs doing mundane work to making well over $100K by being early adopters and then teaching and implementing new tech.

Employee with paycheck makes $100K a year! You don't say!! Now that's an American success story if I ever seen one. Move over, Elon.

If you folks’ could answer the question, will the S&P close lower or higher tomorrow than today, you’d be freakin billionaires. But you can’t, so you’re not. Yet y’all pontificate about what AI will do to society a quarter century from now. Good luck.

Nothing is ever quite as it seems. 

@hilde45 One thing I’ll keep turning over: namely that LLM users weren’t just equivalent to the control group on condition identification -- they were measurably worse. Unless I’m confused, that finding alone seems like the sharpest challenge to the "skilled users will figure it out" interpretation, and I’m not sure the thread has fully reckoned with it. But it’s time for a walk.

We should look at the big picture—i.e., 95% accuracy by LLMs alone versus 34% when used by end users for condition identification. This suggests that AI is highly sensitive to how people ask questions and to the quality of those questions.

There’s nothing wrong with trying to rationalize why Google/web search by end users (42%) slightly outperforms LLM use by end users (34%). One possible reason could be, when performing web searches, people tend to refine their queries and compare or cross-reference multiple sources, which may improve accuracy relative to relying on a single synthesized answer from an LLM.

That said, we’re looking at results that, although statistically significant, are only marginally better (42% vs. 34%). Compared to the 95% accuracy achieved by LLMs alone, however, this represents a substantial (and disappointing) drop-off. It’s important to keep the big picture in perspective.

No.

Up until very recently I was reluctant to use AI but, after reading some AI generated responses in this forum, decided to give it a try. In Chat GPT I plugged in my rooms' asymmetrical dimensions, loudspeaker and subwoofer models and positions in the room to determine the best positions for my two subs. I was pleasantly surprised with the results. After several refinements it suggested one sub between the speakers and one about half way along (and out from) the right wall to mitigate the room modes. I am no longer a skeptic.The integration and low frequency sound/weight are far better than I had before with symmetrical sub positions. I am somewhat blown away but the sound is really good now so I guess you can teach and old dinosaur new tricks......Thanks folks!