Good point; I hand't thought of it outside of tech, but it really is all the same thing over and over, huh?

Man, we gotta scale up our willingness to prosecute white-collar crime real fast!

I wonder if LLM folks might surpass the high baseline sociopathy of other tech fields. I used to feel like it was "I don't care if I ruin your stuff" and now it's "I'm actively trying to ruin your stuff".

I'd forgotten that - was that Betterhelp? But even there, I worry that they didn't actually face meaningful consequences. I still hear their ads on lots of podcasts.

Oh, good! The strongest consequences I'd seen of was Air Canada having to refund a customer who bought a ticket at a rate its chatbot made up -- but that was a trivial consequence compared to the effort the customer undertook to take them to court. www.wired.com/story/air-ca...

Aaaah! Maybe I'm misunderstanding (haven't read the paper), but is this saying that the LLMs will generate novel ideas that may or may not actually work? Every researcher has tons of good ideas that they haven't published because often the hard part is testing the ideas, not creating them!

Love it!
One thing I wonder about, at the very bottom right, is: has anyone ever actually had to take any significant responsibility for their misplaced trust in ChatGPT?

I wonder where the belief that ChatGPT can do everything you'd want it to do comes from? All the rest of our tech relies on specialized programs, apps, or devices -- even web browsers require you to go to multiple websites if you want to perform multiple tasks.

(Oops. Too excited. Sorry for the typo!)

There was one review I couldn't fit into the post, so I figure I'll share it here to give you a sense of who's excited about Aspect.

I'm fascinated by the user who is missing out by not being able to send videos to a chatbot.

How could AI-generated text sneak into your writing without you knowing? It calls to mind the airline check-in question "Have your bags been in your possession this entire time?"

Fingers crossed for that!

I've been frustrated because there are great potential insights for theoretical linguistics from large language models; we've never gotten computers to handle complex grammar so well! But all the praise gets given to these depressing parlor-trick applications instead.

Intuitively, you might think that it's better if AIs make small errors rather than large ones. But I'm not convinced that's the case, at least not with public-facing AI applications.