Justin Ling: Wenn Politiker ihre Arbeit ohne ChatGPT nicht erledigen können, sollten sie diese Aufgabe vielleicht nicht übernehmen
https://www.thestar.com/opinion/star-columnists/if-politicians-cant-get-the-job-done-without-chatgpt-maybe-they-shouldnt-have-the-job/article_ae1c5ff2-fc93-4f8e-8401-ab47a1e0b279.html
5 Kommentare
This is in response to a video that started circulating Reddit and has since been picked up by CBC and the Toronto Star of a New Brunswick PC MLA [appearing to use AI to write his speeches](https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/video/9.7281365) and forgetting to remove the prompt from the speech and reading it aloud in the legislature.
This MLA was a previous Speaker of the House. It raises several questions about elected officials using AI to write their speeches.
Here’s a gift link! [https://www.thestar.com/gift-redeem?t=b6fdb54f-85c6-4e22-9e18-07de4ed820bc](https://www.thestar.com/gift-redeem?t=b6fdb54f-85c6-4e22-9e18-07de4ed820bc)
AI makes you think you’re smart and ‚understand‘, but it doesn’t at all give you a ‚feel‘ for something in the way that you can read how to swim but fat luck jumping in afterwards and knowing how to keep your head above water. AI is teaching people that work isn’t about learning or meaning it’s just about reacting the right way.
It may be a super hot take, but I think it is fine.
There are many ways to use an LLM to write a speech: you can just give it a simple „give me a speech about x“, or you can also feed it several dozen point forms and ask it to stitch them together into a speech – the latter is something I do often with small presentations and work communications/reports, and it generally saves me hours because I am simply not the best writer in the world.
It is pretty common for a politician to read speeches written by their staff, so I think the „you didn’t write the speech yourself“ argument is not something we can use. If we accept something written by their staff, what if… it’s AI?
With AI, my bottom line is that the user would have to take ownership of what is being generated. Don’t attack the fact that someone used LLM to generate something; criticize the content, the flaw in their logic, etc.
Using an LLM to write a speech to me smacks of laziness and a certain amount of indifference toward the public. No matter your field, it is very difficult to escape AI in the workplace but I expect better of elected officials or anyone who’s job it is to actually think, argue, debate, communicate.
The question we should be asking is how much of the speech is AI and how much of the research/analysis is being asked of the AI in the process. It’s one thing to use AI in the editing and redaction process, it’s another to have it do your work.
At the end of the day though, an LLM wielded by a trained and experienced professional speech-writer or redactor who uses it as a part of their workflow is preferable to a person who outsources thinking and writing to the AI entirely.