Seems reasonable to me to interpret the words “ban X” as a ban on X, not as ban on some subset of X. To ban something means to ban it.
The phrases “A ban on X related to Y” and “A blanket ban on all X related to Y” do not have identical meanings and interpretations in practice.
The former is ambiguous and therefore potentially misleading in the context of this bill, the latter is precise but definitely false.
I agree that the original tweet is bad and hyperbolic, but my point is that if you’re going to make a correction, you should correct the exact precise thing the person you’re correcting actually said.
If there is actually any ambiguity here, I am willing to bet literally anyone on this website that, if the bill goes forward, the ambiguities will be resolved in favor of a less aggressive interpretation in subsequent edits.
Yes, I think it is ambiguous whether this:
“would prohibit chatbots from giving substantive responses, including information or advice, that can be mistaken for professional counseling.”
means that making the chatbot include a disclaimer that it is not a licensed professional is sufficient on its own. If you start a response with “I am not a doctor, but...” and then give 2000+ words of actionable medical advice, that could reasonably be mistaken for “professional counseling”, which means it would be prohibited.
The phrases “A ban on X related to Y” and “A blanket ban on all X related to Y” do not have identical meanings and interpretations in practice.
The former is ambiguous and therefore potentially misleading in the context of this bill, the latter is precise but definitely false.
I agree that the original tweet is bad and hyperbolic, but my point is that if you’re going to make a correction, you should correct the exact precise thing the person you’re correcting actually said.
Yes, I think it is ambiguous whether this:
means that making the chatbot include a disclaimer that it is not a licensed professional is sufficient on its own. If you start a response with “I am not a doctor, but...” and then give 2000+ words of actionable medical advice, that could reasonably be mistaken for “professional counseling”, which means it would be prohibited.