Tanya Mosley

You know, it also brings up for me, getting back to grading, we know that sometimes, depending on the subject, it really is subjective. It's the professor, their subjective view of what is being written and whether or not it's creative or not.

You know, it also brings up for me, getting back to grading, we know that sometimes, depending on the subject, it really is subjective. It's the professor, their subjective view of what is being written and whether or not it's creative or not.

You know, it also brings up for me, getting back to grading, we know that sometimes, depending on the subject, it really is subjective. It's the professor, their subjective view of what is being written and whether or not it's creative or not.

But I mean, what you're saying could really destabilize or may have already destabilized that measure for grading, because if there is a paper that is grammatically correct and It sounds better, but it is less creative than someone who actually has sat down and written it themselves. There's just an unevenness there that could cause a bigger issue in the future, I'm guessing.

But I mean, what you're saying could really destabilize or may have already destabilized that measure for grading, because if there is a paper that is grammatically correct and It sounds better, but it is less creative than someone who actually has sat down and written it themselves. There's just an unevenness there that could cause a bigger issue in the future, I'm guessing.

But I mean, what you're saying could really destabilize or may have already destabilized that measure for grading, because if there is a paper that is grammatically correct and It sounds better, but it is less creative than someone who actually has sat down and written it themselves. There's just an unevenness there that could cause a bigger issue in the future, I'm guessing.

You know, Kashmir, have we been here before? I mean, I'm thinking about how people were once afraid of what introducing calculators and computers would do, how they would basically erode critical thinking and problem-solving skills. Are there parallels to today's debates, or is what we're seeing like nothing we've ever seen before or experienced before?

You know, Kashmir, have we been here before? I mean, I'm thinking about how people were once afraid of what introducing calculators and computers would do, how they would basically erode critical thinking and problem-solving skills. Are there parallels to today's debates, or is what we're seeing like nothing we've ever seen before or experienced before?

You know, Kashmir, have we been here before? I mean, I'm thinking about how people were once afraid of what introducing calculators and computers would do, how they would basically erode critical thinking and problem-solving skills. Are there parallels to today's debates, or is what we're seeing like nothing we've ever seen before or experienced before?

Let's take a short break. If you're just joining us, we are talking to Kashmir Hill, a tech reporter at The New York Times, about the growing use of artificial intelligence in our daily lives, from the classroom to the workplace to our homes, and the deeper consequences that come with it. We'll continue our conversation after a short break. This is Fresh Air.

Let's take a short break. If you're just joining us, we are talking to Kashmir Hill, a tech reporter at The New York Times, about the growing use of artificial intelligence in our daily lives, from the classroom to the workplace to our homes, and the deeper consequences that come with it. We'll continue our conversation after a short break. This is Fresh Air.

Let's take a short break. If you're just joining us, we are talking to Kashmir Hill, a tech reporter at The New York Times, about the growing use of artificial intelligence in our daily lives, from the classroom to the workplace to our homes, and the deeper consequences that come with it. We'll continue our conversation after a short break. This is Fresh Air.

Your employer, The New York Times, actually has sued OpenAI and Microsoft for using articles to train large language models. The argument is that the paper's articles are one of the biggest sources for copyrighted text that OpenAI used to build ChatGPT. basically siphoning the newspaper's journalism.

Your employer, The New York Times, actually has sued OpenAI and Microsoft for using articles to train large language models. The argument is that the paper's articles are one of the biggest sources for copyrighted text that OpenAI used to build ChatGPT. basically siphoning the newspaper's journalism.

Your employer, The New York Times, actually has sued OpenAI and Microsoft for using articles to train large language models. The argument is that the paper's articles are one of the biggest sources for copyrighted text that OpenAI used to build ChatGPT. basically siphoning the newspaper's journalism.

And I was wondering, in some respect, would all creators to some degree have some leg to stand on regarding the use of material under copyright?

And I was wondering, in some respect, would all creators to some degree have some leg to stand on regarding the use of material under copyright?

And I was wondering, in some respect, would all creators to some degree have some leg to stand on regarding the use of material under copyright?

You know, I know you've seen those memes where people say that chat GPT is their bestie. It's always telling them exactly what they want to hear. It's always on their side. And then there's the element of these chatbots kind of being in concert with selling you things. You give an example.

You know, I know you've seen those memes where people say that chat GPT is their bestie. It's always telling them exactly what they want to hear. It's always on their side. And then there's the element of these chatbots kind of being in concert with selling you things. You give an example.