> OpenAI’s Joanne Jang, who is responsible for how ChatGPT interacts with users, said model behavior was still an “ongoing science.”

Dismayed by the way that AI company reps use the idea of "science" and "experiments" to mean things that don't work. That's the *opposite* of science and — I'm coming to believe, a genuine risk to public trust in science.

Reading @kashhill's excellent story about living a week guided by AI: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/11/01/technology/generative-ai-decisions-experiment.html?smtyp=cur&smid=fb-nytimes

Generative A.I. Made All My Decisions for a Week. Here's What Happened.

I thought it would make me put glue on pizza, but instead it entertained my children and got me to finally paint my office. How could it transform our daily lives?

The New York Times
Science is supposed to be reliable, trustworthy, repeatable, generalizable, and freely available - all things that current generative AI systems have not been made to be.