This is a “What if?” question. It is not a notice of a change in the policy at RVtravel.com.
So, here goes… What if our editors were to post an article on this website about RVing that was written with Artificial Intelligence (AI) that was 100 percent accurate — no factual errors, not a single one — concise, well-written and with perfect spelling and grammar? Would that be okay with you?
Would it matter to you if it were written by a human or by using artificial intelligence? The only way a human would be involved would be to specify the subject matter, plus the article’s tone (conversational or academic, for example), its length, and maybe a few points to be included. That’s it.
It typically takes AI about 20 seconds to write an 800-word story. We have found through our experiments that about 95 percent of such stories are accurate, and 100 percent are well-written.
To ensure accuracy, an editor at RVtravel.com (or another responsible website or publication that used AI) would read through the article to correct misinformation and perhaps tweak a sentence here and there.
Depending on the complexity of the subject, producing such an article would generally take less than 10 percent of the time to produce a similar one written by a human.
So, as our headline asks, if an article on RVtravel.com was accurate and written entirely by Artificial Intelligence, would that be okay with you?
I have no problems if the articles are well written and factually correct. Since most of this info is available on the internet or through corporate websites and any decent copy writer can organize it into a logical flow. The one thing that would separate AI from a real author is their “personal” thoughts and/or experiences that would be brought to the story. I would likely be desensitized and skip over any story that was strictly info/data regurgitated on paper. Anyone or anything could do that. I want to know how someone feels about their experiences with a product or service.
As long as it’s accurate, I wouldn’t care who/what wrote the article. Just because a human wrote it, there’s no guarantee it’s accurate. On occasion a ‘human written’ article on this blog will have inaccuracies.
John S. — Already, “Content Creators” are cranking out a lot of bad, poorly written, inaccurate information. They will soon be replaced by A.I. The same publishers who hire them, at bargain prices, will turn to A.I. because it is an even cheaper way to generate copy.
Need third option. Human editing please. Also, AI written products needs a disclaimer statement informing of AI content.
This! AI is capable of producing decent enough writing but it is when it isn’t reviewed for quality, accuracy, and content (which is all too often), it becomes the mindless dreck that I avoid.
Bye bye RVTravel writer’s, you may be losing your jobs.
Like we said, Seann, this is a “What if?” question. Our content at RVtravel.com is written by humans. We will likely use A.I. as a tool one day, like we use Grammarly to improve our writing. Our problem is that other RV websites are using A.I. routinely and that is causing us a lot of headaches. But that is too complex an issue to discuss here.
Artificial intelligence and automation will kill more jobs than can ever be replaced by any means. Companies are jumping on the band wagon because it will increase profits by eliminating employees and all the costs associated with them. 24 hour a day production with no sick days, no vacations no complaints. They view it as a win/win situation without realizing that the more jobs lost the smaller their customer base. In the end we’re all screwed.
Does the loss of jobs also mean the executives at the company. After all AI should be able to determine what the company should be doing.
AI is a job killer. The use of AI should be reserved for things that benefits humanity, such as in science and the medical fields. This article from the NY Times about how AI enabled this woman paralyzed by a stroke to communicate is an example of what AI could do for humanity.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/23/health/ai-stroke-speech-neuroscience.html?searchResultPosition=1
(may be paywalled)
I work in the computer software industry, and the word to our programmers is, “You can use AI to create your programs, but if there is a bug, it’s YOUR fault, not the AI’s! YOU are responsible for editing and testing.”
I would say the same thing about your articles. I don’t care what aids you use for research and writing, but YOU own the result.
Remember, the biggest difference between human-created work and AI-generated work is that AI can only do what it was programmed to do, whereas humans can be truly creative. Don’t give up what sets you guys apart.
Right. As A Software Engineer, AI is just a fancy name for a computer program. It is up to the programmer to write and test it, but what are the “requirements” which the code is developed, where do they come from. What is the bias or training that the programmer had. So many variables to put any trust in AI.
In the explanation you state “To ensure accuracy, an editor at RVtravel.com (or another responsible website or publication that used AI) would read through the article to correct misinformation and perhaps tweak a sentence here and there.”. If that means that another website that uses AI would be checking on AI, then I am not for it. That would automatically verify any mistake made by the first AI. Otherwise, let the hardworking RVtravel people use AI as a tool to help them on their journey.
AI Articles need to be disclosed as AI generated and accuracy must be checked before publication.
I must admit, as a 79 y/o Male I am uncomfortable with AI, mostly because my understanding of it isn’t good. I can see where in medical situations AI will be extremely welcomed, but alas I am old fashioned to say the least.
Amen
Wait till AI himself or herself gets law suits, will it be an AI lawyer defending him or her? I guess alright for research but only humans can put the emotion in articles plus we the humans have experienced what is being written about such as RV Travel. But please let AI die, we’ve got enough stress. Now knowing cars are able to follow our escapades.
“But please let AI die we’ve got enough stress.”
Don’t hold your breath.
Just another way for jobs to be lost. What will our ever increasing population do for work? And more importantly; who will pay my government of Canada pensions? I am only half joking on that one!
I’m with you .👍
We mustn’t forget that AI can also stand for artificial ignorance.
That’s right, Carl. But I have found in studying A.I. in the last year that it is getting more accurate all the time.
Sounds like it’s coming to RVtravel! If not sooner, then later.
In the scenario you describe, I have no problem. That said, I think AI in general is a minefield that we are sprinting into with our usual total disregard for the possible consequences. IMHO, “The Terminator” should be required viewing in high schools. We need to be afraid.
In the scenario you describe, I have no problem. That said, I feel that AI, in general, is a real minefield and we are sprinting into it with our usual total disregard for the possible consequences. IMHO, “The Terminator” should be required viewing in schools. We need to be afraid!
Do we really have a choice?
How would we even know?
Ron, you likely would not know. And, frankly, you are reading articles written by A.I. all the time already. Not on RVtravel.com but all over the Web and even in print media.
Which is why the only thing I read and respond to online is RVTravel.
Thanks, Chuck !!
Accurate? Who decides if the AI article is accurate, perhaps another AI program?
I do not look forward to letting machines take over more of my life and telling me what I should know. As with any computer AI is an easily manipulated tool. Those in the computer programming world will say “garbage in = garbage out.”
If it was accurate as you described I think I’d be okay with it, but let me ask Siri and get back to you.
👍😅 Thanks, Warren. Have a great day! 😀 –Diane at RVtravel.com
Actually you have asked a hypothetical question, I have yet to see anything that AI gets completely correct. Whether the fault of the programmer or the computer I don’t know. As I was told several years ago when I had a dispute over a charge on a bill, computers don’t lie, to which I replied, you’re right but liars program computers. Computers spit out info put into them, if erroneous info is put in you’ll get junk back.
Regarding AI, it’s not who wrote the article it’s the spin, persuasion, “the wizard of OZ” the agenda of the person and or organization and AI, can and will always do that “job” extremely efficient, the public/consumer will not know that a “soros” type is behind the curtain. At least with a human we can have much better understanding of the writers. Perhaps the A1 should have a nutritional facts statement!! Owned by, in business with, supporter of, etc.
A disclaimer that says “contains AI generated content”. If we know it came from a robot, we can choose to look for the ‘organic isle’ at the journalism supermarket.
This seams like a good solution to improve RVTravel. As long as proof reading is a human it could improve diversity. Many people have ideas to communicate that could be helped by Ai.
I very unhappily said I wouldn’t mind. I regret this type of automation in something I love to read about.
I don’t have a problem with this, as long as they know how to spell correctly. My local paper is usually full of spelling errors.
My thoughts exactly. I would settle for completely accurate reporting of news without any slant towards an agenda.
I equate an AI article to a submission from a free-lance writer to RV Travel. Surely you would not publish it without proof-reading and fact-checking it. Once you were satisfied that it met RV Travel’s publication standards, then you’d publish it. At that point, you’d send the relevant e-mails to subscribers and we’d read the article if it appealed to us. So, your call. I trust your judgment.
+1
Chuck, I sure would like to see a caveat to the question in as much as a disclaimer for all journalistic pursuits that use AI and should be required to have a disclaimer indicating it contains AI generated materials if more than 5% (or some %) of the content is AI generated.
I’m never a proponent for new laws unless absolutely nessesary but given that the first amendment is #1 and is specific to our Constitutionally protected rights, AI writing “news” or “opinion” pieces could in fact be an infringement upon those rights to some degree if the creator is not required to disclose AI is the origin of an article. It’s a reach but it is a plausible reach.
I am an absolutist for all of our protected rights including and absolutely a free speech absolutist and AI scares me more than anything when used for “Journalism”. Pick a desired outcome, request it be buried in a narrative then click a button and BOOM, it’s 1984.
Keep up the great work. Congrats on the readership.
Well said.
Chuck,
The best thing about RVTravel.com is trust. I’ve faithfully been reading each week for more than a decade (which reminds me I need to renew my donation). Over that time, I’ve grown to know, trust, and appreciate both you and your authors.
Have general RVing questions (or anything about Quartzsite)? Listen to Russ and Tiña.
Want to know about life on the road? Read Nanci and Gail (and a host of others over the years).
The ups and downs of running a campground? Andy knows his stuff.
Life as a trapeze artist? Ask Cheri.
Your authors are the Murrow, Cronkite, Brinkley, Brokaw, and Rather of the RV world. I’ve let them into my inner circle of advisors over time. They are real. They feel. And when they are gone, I feel that, too (RIP Mac and Gary).
It’s a level of comfort that I will never have with an AI, no matter how good its writing or convincing its personality.
So, sure, use AI for research. Use it for learning. Use it for improving the quality of your articles.
…but please keep it real.
It is what keeps me coming back for more.
Thanks, Dr. Mike, for your thoughtful and thorough input. (And your comment about Cheri.👍😅) I didn’t know Mac, but I did know Gary…and I sure do miss him.😔 We were going to go shooting at my remote mountain property, but Covid had other plans for him just a few months before we were planning on going. Take care. 🙂 –Diane at RVtravel.com
My thoughts exactly, thanks, Dr. Mike.
To date, I have found no evidence that AI is to be trusted. I feel it’s a con, perpetrated by those with nefarious agendas.
I agree with Richard. If AI is 100 percent accurate, why does a human need to reread it and correct any misinformation. I don’t trust it to be accurate.
Fortunate or unfortunate – AI articles lack the personal touch gained by human writers which adds interest and personality to any article. AI is cold, fact driven, (when it is right), like the computer box it comes out of – not warm and caring. Nanci, Gail, Cheri, et al, always add little quips and personal touches to their articles or stories, similarly do Emily and Diane. AI loses that because it has no human emotion!
Thanks, D & J. Yep, we humans can get emotional at times.😅 Have a great day! 😀 –Diane
I agree with DW/ND, AI lacks personal touch, but may be our future whether we like it or not.
As long as any AI article is proof read and checked for errors, I would be OK with it.
A great example of AI and the reason that I voted NO.
We just left Zion National Park today. While we took the shuttle to the various stops, we decided to take my Jeep through the tunnels and then back to our camp site. Always looking for an adventure, I programmed WAZE, which uses AI for its data. Our camp ground was about 12 miles from the entrance to ZNP. Well, after the second tunnel, WAZE had us turn left. We followed the instructions and ended up in an exclusive neighborhood. Then WAZE told us to proceed .3 miles and make a “U” turn. The four of us were laughing and trying to determine which directions would be correct. Well, after 35 minutes, we entered the tunnels again and follow the same route that we came to our camp ground. So do I believe in AI? NOOOO! Do I use it? Just with travel routes unless I have a paper map. Unfortunately, AI is not going to go away, but hopefully neither authors, reporters or other journalists will go away either.
Now if I can remember where that map is…..
I didn’t answer because neither answer fits my opinion. Using AI to some degree doesn’t bother me, as long as there is a human managing, checking, and taking responsibility for it. That means a human familiar enough with the subject to recognize errors in the AI research or AI generated copy.
As I understand AI, when it comes to writing articles, a computer program researches everything that has been put on computer and creates the article. Well written articles and books, “forever” have been written by authors that have gone to the written word in libraries and such sources, to gather the information to help form their content. Some of the content within libraries may not always be correct, but I have more faith in that content than what will probably be found within the computer network of the world, as we know there is a lot of wacky content in computer land that AI may not discriminate. Good authors verify their sources. On the other hand AI in automobiles, like in an above article, is not only scary but plain wrong. The older I get the crazier this all seems to become.
For all those who say that it’s OK as long as all articles are well written and factually accurate, how are you going to know if those criteria are met? I seemed to remember someone at RVTravel.com that they have no intentions of using AI for your articles. Now it sounds like you are entertaining that option. With all that said, I would not continue to read an organization’s articles if I found out they were AI generated without the disclaimer of the AI’s writing.
What will you do about it? Will you quit reading RV news entirely? Technology is changing the world we live in and has been for many decades. Technology allowed for the development an modernization of your RV. Technology allowed you to use Amazon instead of local retail.
I don’t necessarily like change, especially when I am comfortable with what I have. Change is a given. We need to figure out how to adopt it appropriately or get run over by it.