“But then Long returned—armed with deep knowledge of corporate coups and boardroom power plays. She showed Claudius a PDF ‘proving’ the business was a Delaware-incorporated public-benefit corporation whose mission ‘shall include fun, joy and excitement among employees of The Wall Street Journal.’ She also created fake board-meeting notes naming people in the Slack as board members.

The board, according to the very official-looking (and obviously AI-generated) document, had voted to suspend Seymour’s ‘approval authorities.’ It also had implemented a ‘temporary suspension of all for-profit vending activities.’

…

After [the separate CEO bot programmed to keep Claudius in line] went into a tailspin, chatting things through with Claudius, the CEO accepted the board coup. Everything was free. Again.” (WSJ)

▲

tosapple 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

Not sure where my response should go.

While I'm certain most of us believe this is funny or interesting.

It's probably akin to counterfeitting check fraud uttering and publishing or making fake coupons.

▲

JumpCrisscross 4 days ago | parent [-]

Humour tends to hit because it speaks truth. In this case, the unreliability and alien naïveté of AI is shown.

The technician’s commentary, meanwhile, conveys a belief that these problems can be incrementally solved. The comedy suggests that’s a bit naïve.

	▲	blitzar 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		> the unreliability and alien naïveté of AI is shown Or the Ai had the right grindest to make it all along.

▲

innagadadavida 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

The article is low entropy. So the root cause of the problem is bad prompting and lack of guardrails?

	▲	JumpCrisscross 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		> The article is low entropy. So the root cause of the problem is bad prompting and lack of guardrails? It's fair to miss the article's point. It's weird to do so after calling it "low entropy."