You must log in or register to comment.

xott t1_j9gzjbr wrote

This is a really interesting case. I thought the email from the Vanderbilt deans about the Michigan State shooting was spot-on in terms of tone and style. I mean, using an AI language model is basically the same thing as using a communications team or a speech writer, so I'm not sure why people are saying it's inauthentic. In reality, it's not so different from what a human would have eventually produced.

To be honest, I think if they hadn't included the 'made by ChatGPT' disclaimer, no one would have even known it was generated by AI. It's not like the email lacked feeling or anything.


Spire_Citron t1_j9hpmw3 wrote

Yeah, in this case the only real issue is that tacking on 'made by ChatGPT' feels kinda weird. I feel like in society we like to keep up appearances and pretend like there's this level of special sincerity in those kinds of messages, but we all know that when we go to write them we're just copying ideas from other similar messages we see elsewhere and doing our best. It's rarely something truly personal, but it's a bit crass to pull back the curtain and show that.


Neurogence OP t1_j9gzrti wrote

Yup. All they had to do was remove that part at the bottom.

But---I do think an email addressing fatalities requires more human touch.


MarginCalled1 t1_j9hp5hw wrote

I use ChatGPT to write all of my emails that require more than a line or two, then I go through and make edits as necessary.

We live in strange times, this is like someone in the late 80s writing an E-MAIL to address fatalities, they couldn't even write a normal letter and send it in the mail like everyone else??!

In a couple years we'll look back and nod at how dumb this is.


saleemkarim t1_j9hspjp wrote

Yeah, reminds me of a late Seinfeld episode about whether or not it's impolite to make an important phone call on a cellphone.


hijirah t1_j9i1ugg wrote

If they would've removed the citation, then they'd be on the hook for plagiarism. It's like they can't win for losing.


End3rWi99in t1_j9iisv2 wrote

> requires more human touch

As a counter argument, I believe a human touch can include anything all over the map. I don't blame someone looking to get more of an unbiased or more reserved iteration before submitting anything important, especially if you conclude it does a better job than you of conveying meaning. I sometimes struggle at getting to the core of what I mean through words. It's one of the reasons emoji's were created.


hijirah t1_j9i1pjk wrote

Exactly. Ppl are so archaic in their thinking. They did everything right, including properly citing ChatGPT.


ghostfuckbuddy t1_j9iwqjf wrote

The email's content is not as important as what it is supposed to represent - that the person writing it cared enough to invest time to personally craft a message. The whole point is completely undermined by outsourcing it to an AI.


ground__contro1 t1_j9j8b8a wrote

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


ghostfuckbuddy t1_j9j93rq wrote

I think if you're getting them to proofread after it's been written, then no, but if you're getting them to write the whole thing for you then yes.


ground__contro1 t1_j9j9x6b wrote

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


Stakbrok t1_j9mc2w8 wrote

But it was outsourced with much love. Just like my wife who heats up frozen pizza with much love.


crua9 t1_j9ibw4y wrote

>To be honest, I think if they hadn't included the 'made by ChatGPT' disclaimer, no one would have even known it was generated by AI. It's not like the email lacked feeling or anything.

I honestly wonder if after a few months or whatever, they will just do it again but not include the disclaimer. Maybe throw it in quiltbot for extra measure.


GlobusGlobus t1_j9iu4ny wrote

It is indeed very strange that they included the made by ChatGPT. The way to do it is, obviously, to make some edits and take full ownership. You used a tool, nothing more, nothing less.

I mean, you have to check everything from ChatGPT. I have used it for composition and sometimes it (obviously) get things completely wrong.


External-Explorer330 t1_j9k6wja wrote

This is interesting. I think people are rightfully upset because these administrators’ specific roles are to support the student community. The aftermath of the shooting would be a time where their duties are of the utmost significant. The problem isn’t that they used AI—they could have used a template from a previous tragedy themselves (that’s basically what ChatGPT did)—the problem is that they did not reflect on the incident themselves and craft a genuine message that specifically pertained to the school and the students. Instead, they essentially did a “copy-pasta” which is insincere and beneath their roles. It probably would have been better if they sent a delayed message. It is acceptable to use a template/AI in many other cases such as a mass email about a fire-drill testing or club event, but a school shooting is a uniquely shocking and evil tragedy that deserves time, sensitivity, and care. Using a template is simply careless. I believe they should be suspended. I honestly can’t believe no one was like “maybe this isn’t a great idea,” or “we should give it more thought.”

Edits: Spelling, clearly I didn’t use ChatGPT lol


Typo_of_the_Dad t1_j9kwnp7 wrote

Seriously? It shows they didn't even read it beyond perhaps making sure it follows the political Diversity Inclusivity and Equity message from one of their HR folders, proving a lack of respect and listening as mentioned in the letter. Of course it's hard to be personal with someone they probably never even met but c'mon.

Not that I disagree it couldn't have sounded pretty much the same if entirely manmade, it moreso shows the detachment and inadequacy of a system.


RepresentativeAd3433 t1_j9p9vtu wrote

The problem with this logically becomes, why would humans ever say anything at all again? Why would we write another word? If the robot can just spit out what we write faster why bother?


xott t1_j9qrok6 wrote

Well, seeing as we still walk in spite of cars, that's probably an overblown worry.


Griffstergnu t1_j9hgy43 wrote

People are nuts if they don’t think chatgpt is writing all manner of communications. It is very capable of doing so. It still takes finishing work by a human and a proofread for sanity, but definitely yields a good first draft.


phoenixmusicman t1_j9imx1k wrote

Chat GPT can write my roleplaying game sessions way better than I can.


Stakbrok t1_j9mc8ld wrote

I used ChatGPT to write a product review and won a $100 voucher from that store for Best Review Of The Month. 😂

Just gave ChatGPT 5 short phrases stating what I liked about the product, and it generated a lengthy af review praising the damn product 7 times to heaven and back ahahah.


Loriali95 t1_j9haq35 wrote

Why does anyone care enough to the point where they got suspended?


ilive12 t1_j9hgc66 wrote

Because it was an email about a school shooting, and they left in the message that it was made from ChatGPT. I get using ChatGPT as a starting point for something like this, but it looks like they pasted in something verbatim while barely even reading what they were sending, especially about a sensitive subject, thats pretty careless.


BookishChica t1_j9hyam3 wrote

And the hypocrisy that colleges are telling their students not to use the app for their school work and here the college took a shortcut and did just that. It just looks bad.


hijirah t1_j9i1zv1 wrote

That's true. They shouldn't have restricted student use.


Loriali95 t1_j9jn2rz wrote

It’s a tool that enhances the way we do things as a species, why the fuck would they ban it? If anything they should be teaching how to use it and when to use it.

It sounds like they don’t know when to use it either. I mean, if they used it to formulate a draft and built on top of that, I don’t feel like that would have been a bad move.

To post something verbatim is insane on any level. Even if it was a mundane thing, the idea is AI is there to assist, not replace.


omgghelpme t1_j9j79oq wrote

lol "hey kids, I'd like to bring to your attention that there's this reaally big super handy tool that will write entire essays for you, please DO NOT use it!"


TheAnonFeels t1_j9gw53u wrote

Something the headline doesn't mention, this was about a school shooting... Not a generic email.


Agarikas t1_j9htuv4 wrote

Unfortunately school shootings are becoming quite "generic". What is there to say besides the usual "thoughts and prayers"..


HolyNucleoli t1_j9l3vcn wrote

I know you're joking, but school shootings of this type (active shooter) are anything but generic - the US averages like 6 a year.

It's a very bad look for it to appear as if these deans don't consider the death of multiple students in a mass shooting something that warrents the effort of writing an email.


Neurogence OP t1_j9gr8ci wrote

>At the bottom, it revealed it was written by AI: 'Paraphrase from OpenAI's ChatGPT AI language model, personal communication, February 15, 2023


redroverdestroys t1_j9i8jbc wrote

Okay, don't include "written by a fucking BOT" in the email - that's just goofy as hell.

I can understand why they would be suspended, not for having AI write it, but for tacking that part on. What the hell were they thinking to add that at the bottom?

If they didn't want to take credit for it, they should have then just wrote it themselves.

Maybe they thought they were being forward thinking and getting in touch with the kids on their grounds, being hip lmao.

Its not enough to be outraged about tho. People need to fucking move on.


lilezekias t1_j9j0bnp wrote

Doesn’t matter how well it was written by Ai, the letter was to address a very important and somber matter. For them to be lazy enough to have it be generated by Ai shows how oblivious they were to the importance of the matter.


Akimbo333 t1_j9huz9s wrote

The only problem was that they were sloppy and careless, lol! Honestly, using ChatGPT is no problem whatsoever!!!


GlobusGlobus t1_j9ity9u wrote

Strange. Seems like a good use of the tool.


sickvisionz t1_j9j9jq2 wrote

Seems like a dumb ruling but at the same time it was like dumb for them to leave in the citation.

This wasn't academic research or some competitive writing task for money, fame, or professional validity. It was just a letter. I don't think you really need to cite sources in something like that. PR companies never get cited when they draft a letter or speech.


Sleepyposeidon t1_j9jmlha wrote

Why are schools and colleges all over the world trying to ban chatGPT? Are they scared that traditional education is becoming irrelevant?