This is the Friends of Mr. Debating Society. I'm John Batchford. Artificial Intelligence, AI, much in the news, much promise. Wall Street is looking at slips. It's the latest way to sell a stock.

AI. I welcome that is McCutter of American greatness, writing about artificial intelligence, what it can and cannot promise, what it has and has not offered.

My testimony straight forward enough is I've tried AI, the chat GPT, and asked it each time who is and then John Calvin Batchford the novelist, which is what I was before I turned to talking to Thaddeus.

And each time it's answered differently. Sometimes it has some of the novels. Sometimes it turns one novel into a nonfiction book. Sometimes it makes up short story collections I never wrote. Sometimes it comes up with its own titles and then analyzes some of my books with themes I don't remember. It's entertaining.

I've learned from a scientific researcher writing at Nature magazine that this is this problem has technical language. The part where AI makes things up that's called hallucinate AI hallucinates.

The part where AI gives me a different answer each time is the problem of reproducibility. This is system wide. You ask the same question you get different answers depending on the time of day, your punctuation, your spelling, different answers.

So Thaddeus, that's my entire limit. At first I thought AI was Wikipedia speaking, but it's not even that. Good evening to you Thaddeus.

Good evening to you, John. I'm sorry I took you away from your art. When you look at AI as you pointed out, there are so many difficulties with it now.

And I think this is one of the reasons that there are calls for regulation from the companies that are engaging in it. It's because they have to get the bugs out of it to make it what they want it to be.

And they do not want competition competition entering the field while they're trying to do it because that could preclude them from cashing in when they finally fix the problems.

I looked at it from a different point of view from a more personal point of view rather than the regulatory scheme or the commercial interest of it.

I just looked at it from the position of someone who like yourself as engaged in art as created art. And in my case music and some literature.

And I just wanted to strike a blow for humanity over the march of technology. And when I looked at it, one of the fundamental things that came to my mind was the fact that AI is the product of human beings.

And so it will be the product of whatever is programmed into it. And that will be put in by individuals. There will be individuals with specific set of skills, set of knowledge.

And it will be there go a limited field that will engage in it. And that very the virtue of it being limited will actually limit the outcome of what it will protect knowledge will eventually produce in terms of art.

Therefore, the art will be derivative in many ways. It will reach a certain static nature in terms of its innovation and its creativity because it will again be certain scribe other people who programmed it.

And the final analysis to me was that it is not really our, it's just a product. And it's a derivative product.

Again, it will eventually be very limited in its imagination.

I'm puzzled about the reported anxiety about AI from individuals who are often in the news must comes to mind, but Gates, I think, has spoken in a similar fashion.

Other leaders of the Silicon industry, what their concern is, I don't see in the chat GPT that's available to me a human being. Perhaps they have some model that is more upsetting to them.

I do hear that they're worried about facial recognition, but that's a problem that's quite outside of the bounds of AI that has to do with surveillance and the ability to manufacture what is it called to to spoof people to change faces to make things up.

Right, deep fakes, things like that. And I appreciate that concern, but that's not the AI that I'm at. The AI that I'm at doesn't remember that it gets things wrong. And so it gets it wrong again.

...