GPT-2 is not as dangerous as OpenAI thought it might be
I disagree, you can have software spit out these meh articles then pay a room full of people with the writing ability of an average 15 year old to go line by line rewriting the content with their own &#x27;voice&#x27; and you can easily churn on massive amounts of content based on whatever you trained it on.<p>For over a decade individuals have used software to take already written content and change it just enough to fool search engines for SEO purposes, it&#x27;s been an effective tactic despite the articles often being largely unintelligible to a human. If you can make something moderately intelligible to a human, about a given area and have some minimum wage employee &#x27;personalize&#x27; it and BAM you can turn a room of a 10, 20, 100 people into a hardcore content machine.<p>I&#x27;ve suggested to Altman before that, given a sufficient body of work, you could churn out fiction in the style of famous deceased authors by having the machine do the bulk of the work then having a small team go in and edit the work to make it fully coherent and an enjoyable read.<p>With someone like me, that uses their name as their username virtually everywhere, you could sufficiently train the machine on my reddit and blog alone to imitate me on social media platforms. It could learn my writing style, my habits of using &#x27;heh&#x27; and &#x27;haha&#x27; way too much on reddit&#x2F;twitter&#x2F;facebook and you suddenly create Bizarro Ryan that you can create new social media accounts for and start tossing in some hate speech in an anti-me campaign. While this wouldn&#x27;t do much to me, to a celebrity&#x2F;politician&#x2F;expert in a field it could absolutely ruin their career, even if later proven to have been faked because popular opinion will still associate that person with that undesirable behavior.<p>While pursuing this technology would be amazing for creating new literary works from people like Verne, Heinlein, Burroughs (your favorite authors here), I can weaponize it RIGHT NOW.<p>This is the problem with entities like Open AI, they&#x27;re all &quot;AI is great, AI is good, AI is our future savior, yay AI&quot; but are any of them going &quot;well, here&#x27;s the 16 ways I can think off, off the top of my head, how to wildly exploit this technology for personal&#x2F;corporate&#x2F;government gain&quot;? AI doesn&#x27;t have to be SkyNet or robotic killing drones to be exploited, an individual can benefit considerably (and cause considerable hardship for an entity) with stuff like this. Who at places like Open AI are asking these questions? Where are the employees&#x2F;advisors&#x2F;consultants that look at each project and offer real time feedback on ways to abuse the project in its current and near-future states?<p>Maybe they have someone but, methinks they don&#x27;t.