|
|
|
|
|
by NiloCK
45 days ago
|
|
At that time, nobody believed a dead internet was technically feasible. Maybe this is hard to remember now. The "danger" was in terms of spam / misinformation proliferation, not the same category of capabilities adjacent risks current discussed. You can hold your own opinions on spam/misinformation as a problem, but to say there was no credibly anticipated outsized downside to a sudden jump in human-passing text generation feels pretty off to me. |
|
It's the kind of people that want to ban anything because of some theoretical small harm is technically possible. We're lucky it's not more prevalent or we'd still be in the stone age.