ai为什么虚构文献

11A pro-innovation approach to AI regulationcreates a range of new security risks to individuals,organisations,and critical infrastructure.43 Without government action,AI could cause and amplify discrimination that results in,for example,unfairness in the justice system.44 Similarly,without regulatory oversight,AI technologies could pose risks to our privacy and human dignity,potentially harming our fundamental liberties.45 Our regulatory intervention will ensure that AI does not cause harm at a societal level,threatening democracy46 or UK values.Box 1.2:Illustrative AI risksThe patchwork of legal frameworks that currently regulate some uses of AI may not sufficiently address the risks that AI can pose.The following examples are hypothetical scenarios designed to illustrate AI’s potential to create harm.Risks to human rightsGenerative AI is used to generate deepfake pornographic video content,potentially damaging the reputation,relationships and dignity of the subject.Risks to safetyAn AI assistant based on LLM technology recommends a dangerous activity that it has found on the internet,without understanding or communicating the context of the website where the activity was described.The user undertakes this activity causing physical harm.Risks to fairness47An AI tool assessing credit-worthiness of loan applicants is trained on incomplete or biased data,leading the company to offer loans to individuals on different terms based on characteristics like race or gender.Risks to privacy and agencyConnected devices in the home may constantly gather data,including conversations,potentially creating a near-complete portrait of an individual's home life.Privacy risks are compounded the more parties can access this data.Risks to societal wellbeing

These two powerful opposing forces,the pervasive expectation of writing and the irreducible difficulty of doing it,create enormous pressure.This is why eminent professors often turn out to have resorted to plagiarism.The most striking thing to me about these cases is the pettiness of the thefts.The stuff they steal is usually the most mundane boilerplate—the sort of thing that anyone who was even halfway decent at writing could turn out with no effort at all.Which means they're not even halfway decent at writing.Till recently there was no convenient escape valve for the pressure created by these opposing forces.You could pay someone to write for you,like JFK,or plagiarize,like MLK,but if you couldn't buy or steal words,you had to write them yourself.And as a result nearly everyone who was expected to write had to learn how.Not anymore.AI has blown this world open.Almost all pressure to write has dissipated.You can have AI do it for you,both in school and at work.The result will be a world divided into writes and write-nots.There will still be some people who can write.Some of us like it.But the middle ground between those who are good at writing and those who can't write at all will disappear.Instead of good writers,ok writers,and people who can't write,there will just be good writers and people who can't write.Is that so bad?Isn't it common for skills to disappear when technology makes them obsolete?There aren't many blacksmiths left,and it doesn't seem to be a problem.Yes,it's bad.The reason is something I mentioned earlier:writing is thinking.In fact there's a kind of thinking that can only be done by writing.You can't make this point better than Leslie Lamport did:If you're thinking without writing,you only think you're thinking.