Privilege is rooted in a belief that candid conversations are good and should be encouraged. That’s what feels off: I agree with that for doctors, priests, and lawyers (as professions) but not sure I agree with it for chatbots.

I also agree we should protect people more from gov surveillance tho.

More privacy for tech users is good! But creating a new privilege for a robot that routinely says inaccurate and dangerous things does seem like a weird way to enhance user privacy, if that is ultimately what this is about.

To avoid a panopticon hell where authoritarians see everything we do, we might:
—regulate who can collect / mine our data and how;
—impose duties of care on those entities;
—strengthen laws about when govs can access chatbot convos (and search history!) and what they can use them for

Do we want to encourage candor with bots like we do with doctors / lawyers? That sure would give them a lot of power! Would it come with responsibility?

Would there be a crime-fraud exception? What if the bot suggests the crime? Could we sue for malpractice? Crim. charges for gross malpractice?

What was the second one?

Living in a democratic republic where you disagree with many of the laws is MUCH better than living in an autocracy where you and the autocrat happen to agree about, like, healthcare and education policy.