Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Alarmingly similar principle here.
In theory, I can sort of understand that kind of perspective. Either you have the means to prevent the thing, or you open it up so you can at least acknowledge and possibly regulate it. This, in a way, is still "fair" in that ostensibly anyone could do it. Obviously, opportunities for corruption would persist, even if some amount of "cheating" were allowed.
Unless draining the use of resources and ruins one's ability to critically think for themselves count as a side effect.
I doubt by the time people overly rely on AI have the capacity to suggest that they might be wrong when they constantly use it to solve stuff for them 24/7.
...A guy literally used it to fact check a obvious fact by the folks who entire knowledge comes from the fact they explored, observed and learned about space.