What we know about this AI from the company OpenAI is that it is a chatbot capable of understanding natural language and replying in natural language. Some call it a surrogate for Google as it is able to give direct solutions to complex problems. Observers find it quite impressive, and such is the case of Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak. However, the latter wants to warn that this artificial intelligence can make serious mistakes. He joins experts like Princeton University Professor Arvind Narayanan who claim ChatGPT is pissed off.
The problem is that he does good things for us but can make terrible mistakes because he doesn’t know what humanity is, he said in a recent interview. Steve Wozniak agrees with several observers.
In fact, it is a repetition of the opinion of some teachers. Ethan Mollick is one of them and has opted for an open usage policy of the chatbot ChatGPT. The reason: The use of artificial intelligence is an emerging skill. Nevertheless, he uses the latter to specify that artificial intelligence can err. Students should therefore verify the results returned to them with the help of others and are responsible for any errors or omissions that the tool returns. Additionally, students must show intellectual honesty by citing their source (which happens to be ChatGPT) as one does when compiling a bibliography. Failure to do so constitutes a violation of the principles of academic honesty.
Arvind Narayanan from Princeton University believes that ChatGPT is nothing revolutionary:
Sayash Kapoor and I call him a bullshit generator, as others have. We don’t mean that in a normative sense, but in a relatively precise sense. We think that he is trained to produce plausible texts. He’s very good at persuasion, but he’s not trained to make true statements. He often produces true claims as a side effect of his plausibility and persuasiveness, but that is not his goal.
In fact, this corresponds to what the philosopher Harry Frankfurt called bullshit, namely a speech that is intended to convince without worrying about the truth. A human storyteller doesn’t care if what he says is true or not; He has specific goals in mind. As long as he is convincing, these goals will be achieved. This is exactly what ChatGPT does. He’s trying to be persuasive, and he has no way of knowing for sure whether the statements he’s making are true or not.
A third of a recent survey by the Study.com platform thinks students should be prevented from using it. 67% of the same sample (200 participants) think that ChatGPT should not be banned from schools and universities. 
The controversy surrounding this artificial intelligence stems at least from the apparent observation that ChatGPT can act as a complement to a search engine. So deciding to ban access means doing the same with platforms where students are also likely to find answers to their assessments: Wikipedia, Google, etc.
ChatGPT is also divided outside of education. Writers are afraid of losing their jobs with the rise of this artificial intelligence. In the software engineering industry, too, the question arises to what extent such tools can transform it.
Source: Interview
And you ?
ChatGPT: ban or adjust? Which side are you on?
How do you comment on all the media coverage of this AI (ChatGPT) and other similar ones?
See also:
According to Gartner, 80% of the technology could be developed by non-IT experts by 2024 thanks to low-code tools
Forrester: The use of low-code development platforms is becoming increasingly important in the digital transformation processes of companies
According to Gartner forecasts, the global market for low-code development technology will grow by 23% in 2021
Microsoft launches Power Fx, a new low-code, open-source programming language based on Excel