Btw it’s a terrible source. It can easily be wrong about established facts. Last week it tried to tell me Thomas Digges posited the existence of alien life. Digges is a pretty early astronomer when the church was dominant so that really surprised me. When I questioned it again, it “corrected” itself and apologized… which, great, but if I hadn’t already known enough about Digges to be suspicious, I would have accepted it in the list of all the other (correct) information.

Chatgpt is awesome, but it’s no more a source than Wikipedia, in fact it’s potentially worse because you don’t have anyone fact checking what chatgpt says to you in real time, whereas there is a chance others will have corrected wiki pages by the time you read them.

I’m not sure I agree with the comparison

Oh, just, yanno, more of it

I mean, humans have lived basically our entire lives, as a species and often individually, governed by forces we couldn’t really explain at the time. This still seems different though. Seems like no turning back. But maybe that’s been true for a long time.

At the whims of unknown forces I expect

Maybe it’s not just about the right combination of words, it’s that they came from someone who is supposed to be an authority figure in that sphere. If you’re the Dean of a school, thinking and speaking about these issues should be resonating with you in a way it wouldn’t with either a pr team or chatbot, because neither are responsible for students

Genuinely curious, is the whole point completely undermined by contracting an outside PR person for a draft of a public announcement?

Perhaps never having to innovate again