Re: Worldcon AI scandal

On 18/05/2025 12:29 am, The Doctor wrote:

In article <100a3bm$dk9b$5@dont-email.me>,
The True Doctor  <agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:

On 17/05/2025 13:44, The Doctor wrote:

In article <1009ppp$bsqh$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70  <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:

On 17/05/2025 9:05 am, The True Doctor wrote:

On 16/05/2025 22:26, Keith F. Lynch wrote:

According to
https://seattlein2025.org/2025/04/30/statement-from-worldcon-chair-2/
the upcoming Worldcon has used ChatGPT to vet its program participants.
>
I'm encouraged by the fact that there were more than a hundred
responses to that statement, and every one of them was negative.  Some
because ChatGPT is infamous for "hallucinating," i.e. making stuff up
out of thin air.  And some because ChatGPT was programmed using the
works of professional writers, incuding would-be Worldcon program

>
Professional writers? You mean the woke ones that write like uneducated
children?
>
No one needs any writer's permission to read their work, not even
ChatGPT. What the creators of ChatGPT should have done is paid the
copyright holders to buy the texts to begin with at the current market
price, about $2-$12 per eBook, rather than downloading them from sites
PirateBay for nothing in order to train their LLM. Of course the woke
perverts want more than the cover price for ChatGPT to read their works
and that is totally unjustifiable. You can't charge readers a different
price to buy your work depending on who they are.

>
Except a (human) reader might read the story a very few times whereas
ChatGPT might use the work over and over and over again.

>
Every used ChatGPT Dannyboy?

>
We all know that's what you use to write your reviews for you.

 :-)

Yes, Binky, that, seemingly, is YOUR bestest Buddy, Aggy, having a go at YOUR use of ChatGPT, Binky.
--
Daniel70