On 06-Jun-26 06:17, John R Levine wrote:
On Fri, 5 Jun 2026, Jay Daley wrote:
This is based on the assumption that AI produces slop. In my experience the
more effort you put into it, the better the quality of output. It will not be
too long before many, many people can instruct AI well enough to produce high
quality output.
That's a reasonable point, but with a prompt that detailed, would the AI
output now be a derivative of the prompt and/or the training? Who knows?
Still think it's fine to ask people to volunteer info about their AI use
but premature to change anything based on it.
Nothing in any version of the draft suggests changing anything, except
requiring disclosure. I don't really understand why that is regarded as
undesirable or onerous. There is indeed a lot of FUD as well as valid concern
about AI usage these days but I don't think a disclosure requirement
contributes to either of those.
Brian
--
rswg mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
