Scrolling LinkedIn this morning, a post was in my feed about Grammarly and its “expert reviewers.” Yes, once again, peoples’ identities–their professional identities–have been stolen. A large corporation is once again making money from stolen work.
But the disconnect is more than that. The original post was shared by someone (I now follow both the original poster and the reposter) who mentioned not being surprised because Claude (another AI agent) had stolen and incorporated work from their book.
And here is the disconnect: the next post is an advertisement for Claude, “the AI for problem solvers.”
Someone please explain to me why, after seeing a post that explains that Claude stole intellectual property from someone, that I would be interested in seeing that ad? I’m supposing the algorithm noticed that there was a post that mentioned Claude, assumed it was a positive comment, and so it fed me an advertisement to capitalize on that?
I thought these algorithms were using AI now? Aren’t they supposed to be more intelligent than that? Shouldn’t the algorithm have recognized that a better ad would be a completely different AI platform, since what I had just read said that Claude was NOT GOOD?
This shows the fundamental issue with AI: it isn’t really as smart as they want us to believe.
- It steals from real people (without stealing, it wouldn’t be able to do anything).
- It doesn’t have the capacity to understand that people are criticizing it.
- It makes errors that a professional public relations expert would never make (I mean, even non-PR people wouldn’t make THAT mistake.)
Honestly, when you look at those three bullets, would you really trust an AI platform to do the work?
Tara Moeller - Editing 