Much needed debate for journalists to be aware of: I think of AI as a bright and friendly robot with ADHD, as it needs close supervision but is extremely useful for doing the preliminary leg-work. The transcription services of Otter & MacWhisper have been a game changer, for a start.
It's a good subject to ponder. I have used it and found it useful, more for brainstorming than anything else. I have read a couple of books online that definitely came across as written by AI. They had no thought and no depth. But for me, AI has its uses.
Really interesting and honest article about a topic that really divides a room! I deliver some workshops on the use of AI and my aim is always to be open about the ethical concerns and ask my learners to take personal responsibility for what they publish.
I work with AI every day. It transcribes my audio files turning top-of-my-head ideas into useable text, it greatly accelerates the researching process, it even makes surprisingly valuable suggestions when I ask for my work to be reviewed. I treat AI like a human assistant under my management and that collaboration has proved really productive. As a person with ADHD I find having another mind in the room to bounce ideas off and get me past ‘blank page syndrome’ is very valuable.
But it also helps keep me on track ethically to imagine that 2nd person in the room. Would I claim their work as mine? Would I publish their work in my name without checking it fully? Are they qualified to provide insight on this topic? Have they copied this work from elsewhere? Ultimately, I have accepted AI into my daily workflow but I do so knowing that I am just as responsible for every word published in my name as I always was.
Much needed debate for journalists to be aware of: I think of AI as a bright and friendly robot with ADHD, as it needs close supervision but is extremely useful for doing the preliminary leg-work. The transcription services of Otter & MacWhisper have been a game changer, for a start.
It's a good subject to ponder. I have used it and found it useful, more for brainstorming than anything else. I have read a couple of books online that definitely came across as written by AI. They had no thought and no depth. But for me, AI has its uses.
Really interesting and honest article about a topic that really divides a room! I deliver some workshops on the use of AI and my aim is always to be open about the ethical concerns and ask my learners to take personal responsibility for what they publish.
I work with AI every day. It transcribes my audio files turning top-of-my-head ideas into useable text, it greatly accelerates the researching process, it even makes surprisingly valuable suggestions when I ask for my work to be reviewed. I treat AI like a human assistant under my management and that collaboration has proved really productive. As a person with ADHD I find having another mind in the room to bounce ideas off and get me past ‘blank page syndrome’ is very valuable.
But it also helps keep me on track ethically to imagine that 2nd person in the room. Would I claim their work as mine? Would I publish their work in my name without checking it fully? Are they qualified to provide insight on this topic? Have they copied this work from elsewhere? Ultimately, I have accepted AI into my daily workflow but I do so knowing that I am just as responsible for every word published in my name as I always was.
That's a really great piece of advice! Treat AI like your personal assistant and question everything it does and your relationship with it.