Chat GPT isn’t something we’ve heard of before, but the video made us weary of how much AI is advancing.
Feels like we’re going in the direction of robots over humans, especially since the AI is multi-dimensional and can not only write the paper, but they can grade it as well.
Influencers post without boundaries online and they have to be okay with having almost zero privacy because that’s how they gain popularity.
· Influencers don’t really mean to become popular, whereas journalists are following trends.
· Journalists address important things and are involved within the community.
· There’s an overlap, but they earn money in different ways. Journalists don’t specifically promote brands, but both influencers and journalists become their own personal brands.
Could journalists act ethically when promoting a product?
You could report on something after the fact: saying that “hey I did this for your company and you should now pay me”
Journalists shouldn’t be looking for stories that can constantly be monetized.
Where does privacy come into play within journalists and influencers?
· It depends on the journalist. Do they want to be personable and take away third place, or do they want to be objective and just report on the issues themselves?
· It comes to the point where journalists have to decide how they want to build their career.
Can ChatGPT be useful under certain circumstances?
· If you’re using it for papers, you’re not doing the actual work that you need to be doing.
· It’s a tool and it’s there, so it comes to the point where you want to align yourself with the new technology, or if you want to fall behind.
· It can be good for those who have ADHD because they are able to see the structure behind processes.
The Social Credit System: ignores the entire aspect of what being a human is. You’re going to have ups and downs, and you shouldn’t be docked for not having a good interaction with every single person that you meet.
· There’s a certain part of your brain that puts humanity into things, but the SCS takes that humanity away. It takes away the qualities of life that are specific to each person.
It could be used to combat biases if it was built correctly, but each person would have to be unbiased to each new person that they meet.
In the SCS you get credits based on personality, doing things that are expected within the community. Whereas systems like Uber ratings work because they are doing a job.
Students are having to fight certain battles everyday, especially when it comes to balancing mental health. There are some students that have a hard time being academically on top of things, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t trying.
· You get out of school what you put into it, and just because some people seem to put more effort into things doesn’t mean that everyone else isn’t putting in any effort.
SCS would be detrimental to mental health because that’s just one more thing for people to worry about. We are already so concerned with how we look and how people see us, that this would be so hard on mental health.
SCS shouldn’t be a huge influence on people’s lives.
SCS can also take away our personalities and our humanity, we will all eventually act the same if we were to be rated like they are in Black Mirror.
In society, we have an undocumented SCS system where we can still keep track of a person’s reputation. We all want to be loved and seen as a kind person, whereas a system to be rated like on Black Mirror would make it difficult to act on our own.
· Without having people pushing back, there would be no change within our society. If we all had to act according to a system, who would push things back when things are unethical?