It’s a national news story thats come to light due to a large number of otherwise healthy, fairly young workers getting sick and dying from silicosis. The suggestion to ban came directly from the occupational safety watchdog, who are tasked with keeping workers safe. https://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/safety-topic/hazards/crystalline-silica-and-silicosis is pretty comprehensive.

In February they released a report (https://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-02/decision_ris_-_managing_the_risks_of_crystalline_silica_at_work_-_for_publication_pdf.pdf) outlining exactly what you refer to, with 6 options for governments to consider. The ban on engineered stone is the most dramatic, and uses basically the same legal framework that was used to ban asbestos in the first place.

Essentially they have been screaming at stonemasons and employees for 5 years to no avail, compliance with health and safety regulations in this area is atrocious, and no matter what laws you pass, more and more people are going to get sick and die from a preventable disease if you leave the stuff on the market.

It’s only in recent years that the real dangers of silicate dust have been understood and it’s being banned for essentially the same reason asbestos was - it’s too hard to manage safely, and the most exposed people (workers) have to be protected. Asbestos is dangerous because it can get embedded in lung cells and not be exhaled - silicate dust is similar. Makes sense to me to put it in the same category especially if some poor bastards are dying from it.

The maker of ChatGPT had made progress on Q* (pronounced Q-Star), which some internally believe could be a breakthrough in the startup’s search for superintelligence, also known as artificial general intelligence (AGI), one of the people told Reuters. OpenAI defines AGI as AI systems that are smarter than humans.

Definitely seems AGI related. Has to do with acing mathematical problems - I can see why a generative AI model that can learn, solve, and then extrapolate mathematical formulae could be a big breakthrough.

I find it interesting that DALL-E still doesn’t understand text - look at all the random Daschuund spelling in the generated images. It knows what the word should look like, but has no framework to interpret or distinguish text from the other elements of the image. It looks like trying to spell in a dream.

Where it gets really challenging is that LLMs can take the assignment input and generate an answer that is actually more educational for the student than what they learned d in class. A good education system would instruct students in how to structure their prompts in a way that helps them learn the material - because the LLMs can construct virtually limitless examples and analogies and write in any kind of style, you can tailor them to each student with the correct prompts and get a level of engagement equal to a private tutor for every student.

So the act of using the tool to generate an assignment response could, if done correctly and with guidance, be more educational than anything the student picked up in class - but if its not monitored, if students don’t use the tool the right way, it is just going to be seen as a shortcut for answers. The education system needs to move quickly to adapt to the new tech but I don’t have a lot of hope - some individual teachers will do great as they always have, others will be shitty, and the education departments will lag behind a decade or two as usual.

Way I see it a hammer is a tool, like a paintbrush or a camera or Photoshop or chatGPT.

If you use the hammer to break a plate and call it art, you get the copyright.

If you set the hammer up on a machine and feed it a million plates to smash, but with your direction and intent - to choose the types of plates, speed of the hammer, to use the tools to output different results - its still art and you still get the copyright.

But if your hammer sits inside a Platesmasher 9000 which randomly takes plates as input, selects which plates to smash, smashes them, assesses the results, smashes more, then outputs a perfect smashed plate without you doing anything - that’s not copyright able. You can’t sya you deserve the copyright, as you did not meaningfully contribute to the work - the Platesmasher did everything. You cant point to the output of the system and say “the system made that and deserves copyright” because it’s just an algorithm, it doesn’t know or have intent behind what it’s doing, and can’t be assigned a right.

What this does is stop corporations from building a million Platesmashers and claiming copyright on a billion versions of smashed plates - human intervention is required as part of the creative process to use the tools in order for there be a right in the first place.