Technology

I don't see how you police/enforce this. The technology is out of the bag, people will find ways to access. Do we need age/location verification for this now too? What if I'm running a local agent? I don't agree with this.

Just have them add a disclaimer or have the hosts be liable for what their chatbots say, stop adding bureaucracy just asking to get selective prosecuted and abused.

I think a better solution is to ban techbros from giving serious economic or cultural advice and take computers away from business majors.

Hell yeah, let's hold them accountable for disinformation. They'll be gone completely in a matter of months.

Want to get rid of that responsibility? Direct the user to the source. Oh wait, that's just a search engine.

Would be nice if regular legal and health advice was in any way affordable though

This reads as a way to protect white collar industries from the effects of AI without addressing the root problem--that AI does not actually think, and that it is little more than a meat grinder full of scraped data.

I may have become too cynical but, as is often the case when you dig deeper, this sounds like the result of lobbyists trying to protect licensing rather than people.

We can be dumb, but we’ve been doing web searches for legal and medical advice for ages because it is too damned expensive and time consuming to go to professionals for every little thing. Not to mention, doctors have so little time for you that it is hard to get them to listen to the whole story to make connections between symptoms.

The LLMs already tell you that they aren’t licensed professionals and, for many, provide citations for their sources (miles better than your typical health website).

As a personal anecdote, my son was having stomach pain but was planning to tough it out. He checked with ChatGPT and it recommended he go to the ER. He did, and if he hadn’t, he would likely be dead now. He spent 3 days in the hospital having his bowels unobstructed through a tube in his nose.

There is value in people having that kind of information at their fingertips.

Regulation is absolutely needed, but I would rather they focus on protecting us from AI being used for military purposes, mass surveillance, etc. rather than protecting citizens from ourselves.

Sounds like a start. More is needed though.

The bill targets AI chatbots that impersonate licensed professionals — such as doctors and lawyers — and bars them from providing “substantive response, information, or advice” that would violate professional licensing laws or constitute the unauthorized practice of law.

It also mandates that chatbot owners provide “clear, conspicuous, and explicit” notice to users that they are interacting with an AI system, with the notice displayed in the same language as the chatbot and in a readable font size. However, the bill clarifies that this notice for users, which indicates that they are interacting with a non-human system, does not absolve the chatbot owners of liability.

This bill gave us the "best" interaction:

https://bsky.app/profile/badmedicaltakes.bsky.social/post/3mghyg5eufk2m

A Bluesky skeet from @badmedicaltakes.bsky.social:

"Twitter user eoghan:

How dare poor people get free medical advice

<quote tweet from Twitter user Polymarket: BREAKING: New York bill would ban AI from answering questions related to medicine, law, dentistry, nursing, psychology, social work, engineering, & more.>

Twitter user YBrogard79094:
JUST MAKE HEALTHCARE ACCESSIBLE

Twitter user eoghan:

AI is literally free healthcare. Being a communist must be exhausting"

I mean.

Is the wikipedia responsible for you reading an article about a law and then taking that as legal advice?

[Edit: if you are downvoting this, downvote away, but you owe an argument below as to why. I promise this exact argument will come up in the courts over this issue]