You have put forward some ideas that I hadn’t considered before. I’m not strictly against AI usage. I’m against plagiarism of said AI without crediting it. If the AI is doing all the work and none from the human, other than a prompt, would it not be the creator of the AI who deserves the reward?
I will have to consider the opinions about the witnesses. The elite few controlling the masses is exactly how many problems arose in todays world and government. I’ll need to be more educated on that subject.
I appreciate the read and counter opinion.
Yes and no. Creator of the AI is the creator of algorithm and training initially.
AI itself by definition evolves. And through your interaction with the AI you further evolves it.
Where do you draw the line to say you have done enough interaction to evolve the AI and now the output is your effort?
But the code itself doesn’t change. It’s the same tool, just being told to behave a certain way by the users prompt. From the AI itself, plagiarism is copying the text without adjustments. If you adjust very little, you still must cite. It’s the same as if you were to copy the text of a book without citing it. In school, you would get a zero and punishment. The same kind of shunning the community gives to people who plagiarize. The AI does not plagiarize because it generates the text but once it’s done, the text that is generated is now officially the ai’s/openai’s. If you are just copying text, I would argue that it would still be under the ownership of the one that generated it. Therefore, income from that should either be burned or donated.
The algorithm is open source. It’s the data and training that go into it the differentiator.
If there is any citation, it’s the common knowledge and the “internet” itself, which would be ridiculous to “cite”.
Let’s just assume going forward more and more of the stuff we see will be by default assisted by AI.
Have you seen any news that could be generated by AI with a citation alluding to AI?