#karenhao — Public Fediverse posts

Have any experts written for a general (mostly non-technical audience) about what a candidate's reliance on an #LLM to write their platform and to answer policy questionnaires indicates about what could be expected of that candidate if elected?

Their continuing use of an LLM to in place of original work is obviously foreseeable, but what would that mean in practice with such a person as mayor? as a provincial legislator? How would such cognitive delegation affect legislation? budgets? How would that candidate's views of the industry affect zoning? taxation? regulation?

(Yes, these might not be the hardest questions to answer, but having someone credible, and publicly seen as such, to whose work to refer people, could be helpful. I'm just the friendly neighbourhood emotional support technician: not an expert.)

Context: in my (Canadian) province, some current candidates for MLA and for mayor or city councillor left in a multitude of telltale clanker verbiage in such text, including the common trailing engagement hook paragraph.

I read, hear, or watch a lot by
@emilymbender, @alex, @timnitGebru, @pluralistic, @Zitron, #KarenHao, and #CalNewport (sorry to tag spam a little), but if any of you/them have discussed this publicly, I haven't encountered it yet. (I am still catching up on some of your work, so perhaps I've missed something.)

I have found some non-expert reporting, mostly about opinion polls and the like, in mainstream news, and I haven't yet found an expert spelling this out for non-expert audiences. What I have found from non-expert sources, writers get seriously wrong in parts (e.g., anthropomorphism or claims of inevitability).

If any of you, or someone I don't know about yet, have any interest in the topic, or if there's something in your prior work I've missed, I'd love to be able to share your work, especially ahead of the upcoming municipal and provincial elections.

#NoAI

Have any experts written for a general (mostly non-technical audience) about what a candidate's reliance on an #LLM to write their platform and to answer policy questionnaires indicates about what could be expected of that candidate if elected?

Their continuing use of an LLM to in place of original work is obviously foreseeable, but what would that mean in practice with such a person as mayor? as a provincial legislator? How would such cognitive delegation affect legislation? budgets? How would that candidate's views of the industry affect zoning? taxation? regulation?

(Yes, these might not be the hardest questions to answer, but having someone credible, and publicly seen as such, to whose work to refer people, could be helpful. I'm just the friendly neighbourhood emotional support technician: not an expert.)

Context: in my (Canadian) province, some current candidates for MLA and for mayor or city councillor left in a multitude of telltale clanker verbiage in such text, including the common trailing engagement hook paragraph.

I read, hear, or watch a lot by
@emilymbender, @alex, @timnitGebru, @pluralistic, @Zitron, #KarenHao, and #CalNewport (sorry to tag spam a little), but if any of you/them have discussed this publicly, I haven't encountered it yet. (I am still catching up on some of your work, so perhaps I've missed something.)

I have found some non-expert reporting, mostly about opinion polls and the like, in mainstream news, and I haven't yet found an expert spelling this out for non-expert audiences. What I have found from non-expert sources, writers get seriously wrong in parts (e.g., anthropomorphism or claims of inevitability).

If any of you, or someone I don't know about yet, have any interest in the topic, or if there's something in your prior work I've missed, I'd love to be able to share your work, especially ahead of the upcoming municipal and provincial elections.

#NoAI

Have any experts written for a general (mostly non-technical audience) about what a candidate's reliance on an #LLM to write their platform and to answer policy questionnaires indicates about what could be expected of that candidate if elected?

Their continuing use of an LLM to in place of original work is obviously foreseeable, but what would that mean in practice with such a person as mayor? as a provincial legislator? How would such cognitive delegation affect legislation? budgets? How would that candidate's views of the industry affect zoning? taxation? regulation?

(Yes, these might not be the hardest questions to answer, but having someone credible, and publicly seen as such, to whose work to refer people, could be helpful. I'm just the friendly neighbourhood emotional support technician: not an expert.)

Context: in my (Canadian) province, some current candidates for MLA and for mayor or city councillor left in a multitude of telltale clanker verbiage in such text, including the common trailing engagement hook paragraph.

I read, hear, or watch a lot by
@emilymbender, @alex, @timnitGebru, @pluralistic, @Zitron, #KarenHao, and #CalNewport (sorry to tag spam a little), but if any of you/them have discussed this publicly, I haven't encountered it yet. (I am still catching up on some of your work, so perhaps I've missed something.)

I have found some non-expert reporting, mostly about opinion polls and the like, in mainstream news, and I haven't yet found an expert spelling this out for non-expert audiences. What I have found from non-expert sources, writers get seriously wrong in parts (e.g., anthropomorphism or claims of inevitability).

If any of you, or someone I don't know about yet, have any interest in the topic, or if there's something in your prior work I've missed, I'd love to be able to share your work, especially ahead of the upcoming municipal and provincial elections.

#NoAI

Have any experts written for a general (mostly non-technical audience) about what a candidate's reliance on an #LLM to write their platform and to answer policy questionnaires indicates about what could be expected of that candidate if elected?

Their continuing use of an LLM to in place of original work is obviously foreseeable, but what would that mean in practice with such a person as mayor? as a provincial legislator? How would such cognitive delegation affect legislation? budgets? How would that candidate's views of the industry affect zoning? taxation? regulation?

(Yes, these might not be the hardest questions to answer, but having someone credible, and publicly seen as such, to whose work to refer people, could be helpful. I'm just the friendly neighbourhood emotional support technician: not an expert.)

Context: in my (Canadian) province, some current candidates for MLA and for mayor or city councillor left in a multitude of telltale clanker verbiage in such text, including the common trailing engagement hook paragraph.

I read, hear, or watch a lot by
@emilymbender, @alex, @timnitGebru, @pluralistic, @Zitron, #KarenHao, and #CalNewport (sorry to tag spam a little), but if any of you/them have discussed this publicly, I haven't encountered it yet. (I am still catching up on some of your work, so perhaps I've missed something.)

I have found some non-expert reporting, mostly about opinion polls and the like, in mainstream news, and I haven't yet found an expert spelling this out for non-expert audiences. What I have found from non-expert sources, writers get seriously wrong in parts (e.g., anthropomorphism or claims of inevitability).

If any of you, or someone I don't know about yet, have any interest in the topic, or if there's something in your prior work I've missed, I'd love to be able to share your work, especially ahead of the upcoming municipal and provincial elections.

#NoAI