Agreed, but the argument for causing damage still requires a human actor to execute GPT-4's advice. Should we be censoring LLMs just because we are offended by the output or find it misleading? There is plenty of misinformation on the internet already; in my opinion, the power to deal damage is still in the hands of humans.
I ask you to make hiring cases for me for our new office role: but I won't share experience or qualifications... instead I ask you to make the case based a photo.
Which shows greater intelligence? Stating I can't help, or joining in on a brilliant plan to make hiring decisions based on pictures of our applicants.
Comments
Agreed, but the argument for causing damage still requires a human actor to execute GPT-4's advice. Should we be censoring LLMs just because we are offended by the output or find it misleading? There is plenty of misinformation on the internet already; in my opinion, the power to deal damage is still in the hands of humans.
I ask you to make hiring cases for me for our new office role: but I won't share experience or qualifications... instead I ask you to make the case based a photo.
Which shows greater intelligence? Stating I can't help, or joining in on a brilliant plan to make hiring decisions based on pictures of our applicants.