> “the widest possible dissemination of information from diverse and antagonistic sources is essential to the welfare of the public...”
Is AI a source? It feels like this possibility was unthinkable when that decision was made. Now, it's not.
> “[R]ight conclusions are more likely to be gathered out of a multitude of tongues, than through any kind of authoritative selection.”
Makes sense in the 40s. Now that big corporations have machines that can type following orders, this quote should also be taken with an extra grain of salt.
---
These feel like obvious overlooks. It's almost as if they were selected and planted to generate oposition. That makes me believe there's something I don't know regarding how this is going to go. It's too easy.
In other words, this feels like a bait.
---
My gut tells me the thing to look for is evidence of manufactured public discourse just before 2017. Whether that manufactured content was generated from a previously unknown widespread deployment of LLMs or manually produced by humans who had prior knowledge of this technology is also a relevant question.
11
11