Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, Solidarity)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank Dr. McQuillan. I was struck by his point that large language models are sold as learning accelerators but that they substitute slop for critical thinking. These models are becoming the first port of call for everything from essays to relationship advice. There are now ads visible across Dublin city - and, presumably, across the country - for ChatGPT that show a couple standing beside a car that is clearly broken down and who are supposedly using ChatGPT to try to fix it.

I do not know if it is legally responsible if they get the wrong hallucination and blow themselves up or whatever. There was a piece on the radio yesterday where a columnist was speaking about how she uses ChatGPT or some AI or LLM for medical advice. There was a doctor in the studio. I missed the doctor as I had got home by then, but I presume they were horrified by this. Also, when you go on Twitter there are people treating Grok as a font of wisdom and truth, whereas the witnesses are making the point that they are not about finding truth. They are about finding plausible rather than factual things. What are the wider implications of this for our democracy? If you can ask ChatGPT how you can fix your car or how you should fix your broken toe, then you can presumably ask Grok or ChatGPT who you should vote for. What is the impact on the wider democratic sphere?