Sujet : Re: Analysis of Flibble's Apology
De : rjh (at) *nospam* cpax.org.uk (Richard Heathfield)
Groupes : comp.theoryDate : 01. Jun 2025, 03:23:09
Autres entêtes
Organisation : Fix this later
Message-ID : <101gdid$1mme5$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 01/06/2025 03:13, Richard Damon wrote:
<snip>
The use of AI generated content, when not clearly marked as such, is considered unethical.
Absolutely, that’s a really important point. Transparency about AI-generated content helps maintain trust and accountability. When content isn’t clearly marked, it can mislead people about its origin, which raises ethical concerns—especially in contexts like journalism, education, or creative work.
Are you thinking about this from a particular angle, like writing, art, or something else?
-- Richard HeathfieldEmail: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999I'll give you two guesses. No, one.
Re: Analysis of Flibble's Apology
Re: Analysis of Flibble's Apology