> Maybe prompt engineering and temperature settings can be enough to prevent this, but ChatGPT has only been out ~6 months and I find the attitude that the burden is on OpenAI to make sure it never says anything bad completely ass backwards. It's like a writer controlling his pen with puppet strings and going "wow, look what it's saying!"

The problem ChatGPT - but especially image, audio and video AI systems - has is that these systems have drastically lowered the barrier to entry to create harmful content.

Everyone can rig up an AI prompt to draw a convincing picture of a politician having sexual intercourse with a child in a matter of mere minutes - a work that would take even a dedicated visual artist many hours. For "voice cloning" AI, it's even worse, as it was practically impossible to emulate that unless you had access to a person talented enough to re-enact voices - and now anyone can pull off completely "legitimate" sounding prank voice calls.

The general availability of such specialized AI completely erodes trust in anything not happening face-to-face - it was already bad enough with people denying actual genocides (Armenia, the Holocaust, Bosnia), but now? How can we even make sure historians can trust records from our time period?