426
Sweden prime minister under fire after admitting that he regularly consults AI tools for a second opinion (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by to c/technology@lemmy.world
126 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 34 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Let's be honest though the majority of politicians are so terrible at their job, that this might actually be one of the rare occurrences where AI actually improves the work. But it is very susceptible to unknown influences.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 19 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Fuck no. Rather an incompetent politician than a hallucinating sycophant just telling you what you want to hear.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago

    I'm just making an objective observation. I don't condone it. I rather we just have competent politicians. But it seems only people who can't function elsewhere are drawn to the position..

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (1 child)

    Nah you are wrong and should use AI as a first opinion

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    They aren't terrible, they make it look like that bcs they do evil things and the public is not who they really work for.
    They know what they're doing and it's easier to get away with it when it looks like incompetence or mistakes.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    That's the big issue. If it was only about competence, I think throwing dice might yield better results than what many politicians are doing. But AI isn't throwing dice but instead reproduces what the creators of the AI want to say.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Creators of AI don't quite have the technology to puppeteer their AI like this.
    They can selects the input, they can bias the training, but if the model isn't going to be lobotomized coming out
    then they can't really bend it toward any particular one opinion

    I'm sure in the future they'll be able to adjust advertising manipulation in real time but not yet.
    What is really sketchy is states and leaders relying on commercial models instead of public ones
    I think states should train public models and release them for the public good
    if only to undermine big tech bros and their nefarious influence

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    You don't have to modify the model to parrot your opinion. You just have to put your stuff into the system prompt.

    You can even modify the system prompt on the fly depending on e.g. the user account or the specific user input. That way you can modify the responses for a far bigger subject range: whenever a keyword of a specific subject is detected, the fitting system prompt is loaded, so you don't have to trash your system prompt full of off-topic information.

    This is so trivially simple to do that even a junior dev should be able to wrap something like that around an existing LLM.

    Edit: In fact, that's exactly how all these customized ChatGPT versions work.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Depending on the AI, it will conclude that he ought to buy a new phone charger, deport all the foreigners, kill all the Jews or rewrite his legislation in Perl. It's hard to say without more information.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •