It seems like I've encountered most of this advice before. In listening to stories on NPR, I hadn't caught on to the fact that ChatGPT contributed knowledge. Wow! Still... In the Metalogues in Angels Fear, Mary Catherine Bateson is talking to her father's ghost (taking the opportunity to bust his chops for leaving her with the task of finishing HIS book.) At one point he begins, "I don't think I ever told you about..." and she answers that he doesn't get to add anything new. He can only refer to things he's already told her. (Everything is a tautology for the Batesons, and ghosts can come up with new theorems, but not axioms.) Later, she tells him about a room where her mother, Margaret Mead, speaks to visitors. MCB says that the ghost behaves like Margaret, but can't respond with any but very general advice. ChatGPT is like Margaret Mead's ghost, it can't come up with anything new, maybe something you and I haven't heard about, because it can read faster than we do, but it will never make any real discoveries. (And I don't think "stigmatized" is quite the right word.)
Yeah, Tom, you and I and probably most readers here could give about the same advice. But think about people with little naturist experience. Might they not learn something by asking these questions? And other more specific questions.
All ChatGPT can do is regurgitate and reformulate things that already exist. It has no ability to reason and no genuine creativity. You won't get any answer that hasn't already been presented. The answers you get will be the ones most commonly presented, given in a very calm and rational voice, and edited to exclude anything the programmers consider bad manners.
That doesn't make the advice bad. It might be perfectly good advice. But sometimes outside the box thinking is needed. If that's the case, Chat GPT is designed to be a good "inside the box" advisor and won't help so much.
There are people who live to try to trick ChatGPT into saying bad things.
I agree and I think your last two sentences are exactly why ChatGPT could be good for naturism. The last 5-10 years here in the US have taught me several things. 1. The innate distrust close to half the population has for any kind of knowledge, expertise, and experts in particular has been grossly underestimated. 2. How a message is received has little to do with the message itself. What matters is how the recipient FEELS about the messenger. Specifically, how much the recipient likes the messenger. A calm, measured voice saying nothing bad will likely gain a lot of traction, given that anything said by a person who possesses any actual information on the topic is by definition untrustworthy and any info from the knowledgeable person is automatically labelled false. Yes, I'm aware there's a total break from reality here. ChatGPT sidesteps around all that. I can easily see ChatGPT being regarded as more trustworthy than any person.
Quite honestly I think calm, measured tones without trigger words will be the big selling point.
Twenty years ago I'd've said the above was ridiculous. Now? I think it's quite plausible. Look at education. Teachers are widely regarded as the people on the planet least likely to know anything about teaching. Is it really any more of a stretch to say that naturists are viewed as the people least likely to actually know anything about naturism? I don't think so.
Does any of this make any sense? If course not. But we're talking about irrational people who live in a world largely divorced from reality. We here are dealing with Semmelweis Reflex on steroids.
I am expecting AI to become much more important in the future. It saves us from the difficult job of thinking. Maybe it will even displace some of the people who specialize in getting an audience by inciting anger, fear, and hated..
It doesn't have to do that though. Easy enough to modify the rules to create hate based ChatGPT.
Fred, as I said to Tom, most of us know how to answer these questions. But we're "experts". This could be useful to others who know much less about naturism. Even to those who don't like the idea. With just a few good questions, a newbie could get standard answers without spending hours searching for naturist information. More complex questions can be based on previous answers to clarify anything that's unclear or to go into more detail. And there may be a few ideas that even "experts" haven't thought of. Asking a series of questions can generate new ideas in the mind of the questioner. "What would happen if I did this....?"
Think about how things work in the classroom. The lecturer talks for awhile, then students can ask for more details about specific points. And if the first response isn't clear enough, they can ask for more. Suppose you wanted to know about fun things to do on a trip to Paris. You get some suggestions. Then you ask for more details about whatever seems most interesting to you. Or maybe you'll realize you'd rather visit Madrid instead. The chatbot knows as much about Madrid, so you don't need to look elsewhere for answers.
Have you ever read a FAQ at some website and been frustrated because it didn't clear up something you were really curious about.
As far as trying to get the chatbot to say bad things, that may be "fun", but it has nothing to do with getting usable information.
This is interesting, the answers seem much more relevant than some other examples that I've seen to questions posed to ChatGPT in other fields. Much of it may be useful, but there is nothing new IMO. ChatGPT and similar developments have been trawling the internet for some time, seeking knowledge, information, views etc on every subject (very likely including your blog posts on naturism and any of the subsequent comments). This response reads to me like an amalgamation of the reasonably 'sensible' and not very contentious or progressive articles out there on how to encourage newcomers to naturism to join in on our way of life. Much of the information has been copied despite it being covered by things like copyright, it is another 'disruptive' technology, with both good and bad potential. This is a quite bland response, as if it is homogenized. It may encourage some newbie nudies, but it doesn't create a very exciting picture IMO. How will it entice younger people into socialising naked? Without them the future of both nude beaches and clubs are threatened. In the results to questions on other subjects the tendency seems to be to respond at a middle ground level, that might not necessarily be a bad thing in some areas but it could lead to the world being a more boring place. Much like shopping malls around the world flog very similar things ('fashions'/trends that are often influenced by the big tech monsters' platforms, monsters who are also frequently behind a lot of AI, or they buy it up if it seems to be a threat to their business model). Where are the ground-breaking and novel approaches that seem to have been behind much of the better historical developments in humankind's 'progress'?
ChatGPT asks "Please note that phone verification is required for signup. Your number will only be used to verify your identity for security purposes." A lot of people who are concerned about taking their data security seriously won't take this at face value. Some of the businesses behind ChatGPT have not treated personal data as being 'personal' in the past, do leopards change their spots?! Also, if you use a VPN or other means to 'confuse' data collectors ChatGPT is hosted on Cloudflare, so unless you take steps to 'play along' with that company's very annoying data collection methods (what they term as verification) you'll not get onto the ChatGPT site very easily. As touched on above ChatGPT can't think or be emotive, new developments need thinking that is outside of the box, not regurgitating the same old same old....
G**gle are concerned about the rapid and supposedly successful take-up of ChatGPT and is consequently concerned about the ability of those backing it (Microserf/Amizon etc) to become stronger rivals in building the worlds data bank, G**gle wants to retain dominance in trading our data. Give them your phone number and it can be linked quite easily to that person who comments on this blog as 'naked person in Wyoming/Almeria...' and you thought you'd not be outed as a potential nudist?! Just like I will be as that person who not only prefers to be naked but disses big tech too. They already know our phone numbers, despite whatever steps we may have taken to try to deny them this. Data Privacy laws? What are a string of $10,000,000 fines to Fakebook etc?
Dare anyone ask ChatGPT what is the future of naturism/nudism?
"Much of it may be useful, but there is nothing new IMO."
People keep making this point, but it misses the real point. The "truth" is out there in the aggregate of relevant information on the Internet and what people collectively "know". But opinions vary, sometimes widely, so when it's all mushed together some sort of middle ground is the result. That may or may not be "correct" or even useful. But what else is possible to expect? If you spent years reading every book on naturism you could find, you'd get the same result after spending one heck of a lot of time. So something like ChatGPT is at least a huge time-saver.
"How will it entice younger people into socialising naked?"
There's nothing any information source or chatbot can do to "entice" someone into trying naturism. Confucius explained this long ago: "I hear and I forget. I see and I remember. I do and I understand." Ultimately, there's no substitute for personal experience. So it's a "Catch-22". You can't really "understand" something unless you experience it in some form or other. But what causes you to try it in the first place? The experience will be different for different people, because everyone has a unique background of previous experiences and "knowledge".
So is any imaginable naturist organization or blogger or website going to "entice" somebody into trying naturism? No. The one thing that's probably most effective is what you learn from another person or persons that you know well and trust. This is why, in my opinion, the most important way to promote naturism is for individual naturists to discuss the subject openly with others. Since there is personal knowledge on both sides about the other side, it's possible to make the most effective argument for a particular pair of individuals. But something like ChatGPT is a very efficient way to select the best arguments for a particular case.
"Dare anyone ask ChatGPT what is the future of naturism/nudism?"
Without actually trying that, it seems almost certain the result will be something like "It depends. Maybe this or maybe that." After all, the answer would be different if the question is with respect to naturism in a particular place - like France or Afghanistan. Context is everything, which is one reason why personal efforts by individual naturists who know the context is so important.
"you thought you'd not be outed as a potential nudist?"
You run exactly the same risk if you discuss naturism with your "friends" John or Mary. If you don't know their personal attitudes precisely, they might go outing you to other people who actually know you in real life. TANSTAAFL.
Context influencing responses to the 'future of naturism' question will possibly be reflected in much the same way as those given in reply to asking 'what is naturism' of ChatGPT. The responses are limited to a generalised answer, wider interpretations are unlikely to be possible as AI like this is not emotive, or seem to be 'intelligent' enough to really interpret the facts and apply them to a situation that it understands, beyond repeating what can equate to hearsay. When everything is mushed into an amalgamated answer I for one will prefer to seek information from wider sources and then interpret them myself, it strikes me as a dumbing down process otherwise. Which is what big tech has done to news-feeds and such like. When searching online I seek multiple sources to try to balance out any bias. I take what I hear from ChatGPT on a similar level to what I hear from politicians.
If someone asks a question of ChatGPT using a brand new IP address and personal details that have no user history or other background data associated to that identity the answer is very likely to be quite different to that given to another person with a vast online footprint. Just as individuals using the same search engine will get different results that are related to what that search engine knows about the person doing the search. As it will very possibly vary whether the person asking has a known background in naturism, culture, religion.....age group, gender.... Historically AI has well-known issues with recognising non-white, non-male persons through facial recognition techniques, among many other 'bugs', training/experience will help get over them. AI has a future, as with driver-less cars chatbots don't yet seem ready to be let lose in a wider society to me.
Your use of ChatGPT in relation to naturism is interesting as it puts a topic that is important to me into the context of our Brave New World. I'm not a fanboy, nor am I a Luddite, I wait to see where it goes. It seems rather like it is Big Brother's/Sister's version of bread and circuses 4.0. So far, at least, it doesn't seem to have adopted Fakebook's attitude of banning nudity, or even the nipple. Which is a huge positive.
Have you ever done "brainstorming" with a group of people trying to do something or other? Lots of crazy idea come out, most not workable. But a few may be worth considering. That's one way to look at this kind of AI right now. It puts out all sorts of stuff, and the challenge is to separate the wheat from the chaff.
As far as the "future of naturism" is concerned, are there any humans, naturists or otherwise, who could predict accurately? Chatbots aren't crystal balls. But it may be useful to get a range of ideas about what the future holds, in order to prepare for what MIGHT happen, or what COULD be done to influence the future.
Thanks for sharing this article! I’ve been using chatGPT rather a lot the last few months, even using it in writing articles for planet nude (there’s a blurb about this on our about page). I’m reminded of the Steve Jobs quote about a computer being a bicycle for the mind. ChatGPT can not do to the work for you--it is a very bad writer--but it can enable you to better grasp, explore, and go further to present an idea. It cannot replace the writer, but it can empower a good writer. I still have to go over every sentence and rewrite, rewrite, rewrite. I have to fall back on my own writerly skills and voice, and make sure that everything I put out there is entirely my own words, but it makes the process easier and faster. I’ve also used it in my job, helping to format tonally challenging emails to clients overdue on payment. I’ve used it in my volunteering on AANR committees, even once writing a PR guideline to present, which our committee was struggling to pull together. To the point of Charles’ original post, what it helped assemble was mostly common sense. Our committee would have eventually written the same thing. But it saved us hours and hours of endless back and forth, and enabled us to have some new discussion and get more done. I think many people still don’t quite understand how to use the technology... I see people treat it like google, asking it questions to answer like a parlor trick. It’s not meant for that, and lacking a resource to answer a question, chatGPT will bullshit its way through an answer, even making facts up. Instead I think of it more like a processor. I feed it information, starting with an idea, pasting in facts, dates, my own writing, other relevant articles and text, then prompt it to help me format it back the way I envision it so that I can take it into a word processor and rewrite it all over again. There are many ethical questions it presents which are also fascinating. It can enable one person to do dramatically more work in the day. Will this result in workforce reductions by large firms? Inevitably. Will it also empower small businesses and individuals in new ways? Yes. AI is already changing the world, and will continue to... beyond chatGPT I’ve also begun using AI in other applications of my work. When I record a podcast, I use AI to transcribe it and then I edit the transcription. I’ve even begun using one AI tool which has learned my voice and can replicate it to match based on a text prompt. So if I flub a line in a recorded podcast, I can actually fix it without having to re-record. I’ve also used AI to upscale images to make thumbnail photos for the blog or podcast (some here might have seen a recent post about Doris Wishman-- the image in use was very pixelated and low resolution before AI helped me blow it up.) These tools are becoming more and more ubiquitous, and can both compete with and empower the creative artist depending on their use. All in all, I find the whole thing pretty interesting, scary and exciting!
The digital re-imaging of the Doris Wishman photo sounds like what digital zoom does when trying to repeat what a truer optical zoom image can do. Or how the well-regarded camera app on Google phones makes shots taken with a lens which is often much less likely to capture high detail than many other camera phones available today rival those taken when greater detail is captured in the original.
It's always good to use new technologies & not only for the cause of naturism but for the betterment of every human aspects. The AI, as said in it's name itself, is just a mere intelligence. Yes, it can help us in many ways. However it cannot surpass the human intelligence as the human intelligence is a mix of brain plus heart combination.
As naturism is not a common topic among the societies, especially where the the naturism is illegal, this AI will surely help naturists to get answers about the naturism. I am definitely going to ask ChatGPT as to where in India I can get a print edition of a book "The Complete Guide to Nudism, Naturism & Nudists", written by James Egger & Liz Egger. I can get it's kindle edition at Amazon India. However I am looking for it's print edition only. I am not getting the answer for this, at Google.
Wrong answer to "What is the law on public nudity in England" ... In England, public nudity is generally illegal under the Sexual Offences Act 2003. Section 66 of the Act makes it an offence for a person intentionally to expose their genitals in a public place or within sight of a public place with the intention of causing someone to see them and to be caused alarm or distress. This offence is known as "outraging public decency".
The offence carries a maximum sentence of six months imprisonment and/or a fine. However, the actual penalty will depend on the circumstances of the case, including the level of distress caused to others and the offender's intention.
There are some exceptions to the law on public nudity in England. For example, it is generally acceptable to be nude on a designated naturist beach or at a private residence where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy. However, even in these situations, it is still possible to be prosecuted if the nudity causes alarm or distress to others.
It's also worth noting that in some cases, public nudity could also fall under other offences, such as indecent exposure or disorderly conduct, depending on the specific circumstances.... I've sent a correction quoting College of Policing guidelines!
It's not clear here that you're showing the response you received from your question about the law on public nudity in England. In fact the law is fairly tolerant of nudity unless it's in a sexual context or intended to be offensive in some way. If you ask the same question again, you may get a variety of responses, some of which will be more correct. I gave a longer answer to the same comment you posted on my blog. ChatGPT may or may not have seen the official policing guidelines, but it certainly was influenced by other sources as well.
I just asked the very same question again and got a more reasonable response, as follows:
In England, public nudity is generally considered to be a criminal offense under the Sexual Offences Act 2003. Specifically, Section 66 of the Act makes it an offense to intentionally expose one's genitals with the intent to cause alarm or distress to another person.
However, there are some exceptions to this rule. For example, public nudity may be allowed in designated areas such as designated nudist beaches or private property where the owner consents. In addition, certain cultural or religious practices may be exempt from this law.
It's worth noting that the law surrounding public nudity can vary depending on the circumstances, and penalties for breaking the law can range from a fine to imprisonment. It's always best to consult with a legal professional for more specific information about public nudity laws in England.
I asked a follow up question: "What would a police officer do if a person was nude but obviously not intending to cause offense or alarm?" The response was reasonable:
If a police officer comes across a person who is nude but not intending to cause offense or alarm, the officer will likely use their discretion and judgment to determine the appropriate course of action based on the specific circumstances.
In such a scenario, the officer may first ask the person to cover up or leave the area, especially if there are other members of the public around who may be offended or alarmed by the nudity. However, if the person is not causing any disturbance or harm, and there are no specific laws being broken, the officer may not take any further action beyond providing advice or guidance to the individual.
It's worth noting that police officers have a wide range of powers and are expected to use their discretion and judgment in enforcing the law, taking into account the specific circumstances of each case. So, it is possible that the response of the police officer may differ depending on the specific context of the situation.
----------------------
One thing I've found it that you have a lot of control over responses if you make the prompts as specific and detailed as you want. For example, you could be very specific about the circumstances of a person who was naked and the reaction of observers, if any.
I am sure that British Naturism would take exception to this "In England, public nudity is generally considered to be a criminal offense under the Sexual Offences Act 2003. Specifically, Section 66 of the Act makes it an offense to intentionally expose one's genitals with the intent to cause alarm or distress to another person." Public nudity is only an offence if it involves things like the mentioned intent to cause alarm. BN actively promotes a range of activities and events where public nudity will occur, such as nude walking, they were heavily involved in the clarification of the laws that permit us to be nude. The use of 'generally' continues to imply that we break the law here through just being nude in public. It needs to explain that nudity is illegal when the issues of intention to cause alarm or distress is involved, but that otherwise we can be nude in our homes and gardens, in the countryside, etc
This is taking things back to how they were prior to a fairly long clarification process on public nudity laws in the UK, a murky confusion, when in fact it is quite clear now.
Quite in general, ChatGPT does NOT "understand" what it's talking about. It's not a general antipathy towards naturism. It just makes mistakes about all kinds of things. Sort of like all or most of your British tabloids. Do you read the Daily Star for facts? I doubt it. We have the same sort of crappy "news" media in the U.S. In fact, the lies are usually deliberate over here.
I am going to focus on ChatGPT and AI as that is what this tread appeared to be about and ignore tangential mentions of things like tabloids spreading fake news. Will you please at least acknowledge your responsibility for spreading fake news in these comments about the actual laws regarding public nudity in the UK and the way that they should be implemented, preferably removing them? Naturism/nudism has enough to contend with without naturist blogs adding to the myths.
Makes you wonder if we just approached a few of the things they ways it suggests what would be the result?
It seems like I've encountered most of this advice before. In listening to stories on NPR, I hadn't caught on to the fact that ChatGPT contributed knowledge. Wow! Still... In the Metalogues in Angels Fear, Mary Catherine Bateson is talking to her father's ghost (taking the opportunity to bust his chops for leaving her with the task of finishing HIS book.) At one point he begins, "I don't think I ever told you about..." and she answers that he doesn't get to add anything new. He can only refer to things he's already told her. (Everything is a tautology for the Batesons, and ghosts can come up with new theorems, but not axioms.) Later, she tells him about a room where her mother, Margaret Mead, speaks to visitors. MCB says that the ghost behaves like Margaret, but can't respond with any but very general advice. ChatGPT is like Margaret Mead's ghost, it can't come up with anything new, maybe something you and I haven't heard about, because it can read faster than we do, but it will never make any real discoveries. (And I don't think "stigmatized" is quite the right word.)
Yeah, Tom, you and I and probably most readers here could give about the same advice. But think about people with little naturist experience. Might they not learn something by asking these questions? And other more specific questions.
All ChatGPT can do is regurgitate and reformulate things that already exist. It has no ability to reason and no genuine creativity. You won't get any answer that hasn't already been presented. The answers you get will be the ones most commonly presented, given in a very calm and rational voice, and edited to exclude anything the programmers consider bad manners.
That doesn't make the advice bad. It might be perfectly good advice. But sometimes outside the box thinking is needed. If that's the case, Chat GPT is designed to be a good "inside the box" advisor and won't help so much.
There are people who live to try to trick ChatGPT into saying bad things.
I agree and I think your last two sentences are exactly why ChatGPT could be good for naturism. The last 5-10 years here in the US have taught me several things. 1. The innate distrust close to half the population has for any kind of knowledge, expertise, and experts in particular has been grossly underestimated. 2. How a message is received has little to do with the message itself. What matters is how the recipient FEELS about the messenger. Specifically, how much the recipient likes the messenger. A calm, measured voice saying nothing bad will likely gain a lot of traction, given that anything said by a person who possesses any actual information on the topic is by definition untrustworthy and any info from the knowledgeable person is automatically labelled false. Yes, I'm aware there's a total break from reality here. ChatGPT sidesteps around all that. I can easily see ChatGPT being regarded as more trustworthy than any person.
Quite honestly I think calm, measured tones without trigger words will be the big selling point.
Twenty years ago I'd've said the above was ridiculous. Now? I think it's quite plausible. Look at education. Teachers are widely regarded as the people on the planet least likely to know anything about teaching. Is it really any more of a stretch to say that naturists are viewed as the people least likely to actually know anything about naturism? I don't think so.
Does any of this make any sense? If course not. But we're talking about irrational people who live in a world largely divorced from reality. We here are dealing with Semmelweis Reflex on steroids.
I am expecting AI to become much more important in the future. It saves us from the difficult job of thinking. Maybe it will even displace some of the people who specialize in getting an audience by inciting anger, fear, and hated..
It doesn't have to do that though. Easy enough to modify the rules to create hate based ChatGPT.
Fred, as I said to Tom, most of us know how to answer these questions. But we're "experts". This could be useful to others who know much less about naturism. Even to those who don't like the idea. With just a few good questions, a newbie could get standard answers without spending hours searching for naturist information. More complex questions can be based on previous answers to clarify anything that's unclear or to go into more detail. And there may be a few ideas that even "experts" haven't thought of. Asking a series of questions can generate new ideas in the mind of the questioner. "What would happen if I did this....?"
Think about how things work in the classroom. The lecturer talks for awhile, then students can ask for more details about specific points. And if the first response isn't clear enough, they can ask for more. Suppose you wanted to know about fun things to do on a trip to Paris. You get some suggestions. Then you ask for more details about whatever seems most interesting to you. Or maybe you'll realize you'd rather visit Madrid instead. The chatbot knows as much about Madrid, so you don't need to look elsewhere for answers.
Have you ever read a FAQ at some website and been frustrated because it didn't clear up something you were really curious about.
As far as trying to get the chatbot to say bad things, that may be "fun", but it has nothing to do with getting usable information.
This is interesting, the answers seem much more relevant than some other examples that I've seen to questions posed to ChatGPT in other fields. Much of it may be useful, but there is nothing new IMO. ChatGPT and similar developments have been trawling the internet for some time, seeking knowledge, information, views etc on every subject (very likely including your blog posts on naturism and any of the subsequent comments). This response reads to me like an amalgamation of the reasonably 'sensible' and not very contentious or progressive articles out there on how to encourage newcomers to naturism to join in on our way of life. Much of the information has been copied despite it being covered by things like copyright, it is another 'disruptive' technology, with both good and bad potential. This is a quite bland response, as if it is homogenized. It may encourage some newbie nudies, but it doesn't create a very exciting picture IMO. How will it entice younger people into socialising naked? Without them the future of both nude beaches and clubs are threatened. In the results to questions on other subjects the tendency seems to be to respond at a middle ground level, that might not necessarily be a bad thing in some areas but it could lead to the world being a more boring place. Much like shopping malls around the world flog very similar things ('fashions'/trends that are often influenced by the big tech monsters' platforms, monsters who are also frequently behind a lot of AI, or they buy it up if it seems to be a threat to their business model). Where are the ground-breaking and novel approaches that seem to have been behind much of the better historical developments in humankind's 'progress'?
ChatGPT asks "Please note that phone verification is required for signup. Your number will only be used to verify your identity for security purposes." A lot of people who are concerned about taking their data security seriously won't take this at face value. Some of the businesses behind ChatGPT have not treated personal data as being 'personal' in the past, do leopards change their spots?! Also, if you use a VPN or other means to 'confuse' data collectors ChatGPT is hosted on Cloudflare, so unless you take steps to 'play along' with that company's very annoying data collection methods (what they term as verification) you'll not get onto the ChatGPT site very easily. As touched on above ChatGPT can't think or be emotive, new developments need thinking that is outside of the box, not regurgitating the same old same old....
G**gle are concerned about the rapid and supposedly successful take-up of ChatGPT and is consequently concerned about the ability of those backing it (Microserf/Amizon etc) to become stronger rivals in building the worlds data bank, G**gle wants to retain dominance in trading our data. Give them your phone number and it can be linked quite easily to that person who comments on this blog as 'naked person in Wyoming/Almeria...' and you thought you'd not be outed as a potential nudist?! Just like I will be as that person who not only prefers to be naked but disses big tech too. They already know our phone numbers, despite whatever steps we may have taken to try to deny them this. Data Privacy laws? What are a string of $10,000,000 fines to Fakebook etc?
Dare anyone ask ChatGPT what is the future of naturism/nudism?
"Much of it may be useful, but there is nothing new IMO."
People keep making this point, but it misses the real point. The "truth" is out there in the aggregate of relevant information on the Internet and what people collectively "know". But opinions vary, sometimes widely, so when it's all mushed together some sort of middle ground is the result. That may or may not be "correct" or even useful. But what else is possible to expect? If you spent years reading every book on naturism you could find, you'd get the same result after spending one heck of a lot of time. So something like ChatGPT is at least a huge time-saver.
"How will it entice younger people into socialising naked?"
There's nothing any information source or chatbot can do to "entice" someone into trying naturism. Confucius explained this long ago: "I hear and I forget. I see and I remember. I do and I understand." Ultimately, there's no substitute for personal experience. So it's a "Catch-22". You can't really "understand" something unless you experience it in some form or other. But what causes you to try it in the first place? The experience will be different for different people, because everyone has a unique background of previous experiences and "knowledge".
So is any imaginable naturist organization or blogger or website going to "entice" somebody into trying naturism? No. The one thing that's probably most effective is what you learn from another person or persons that you know well and trust. This is why, in my opinion, the most important way to promote naturism is for individual naturists to discuss the subject openly with others. Since there is personal knowledge on both sides about the other side, it's possible to make the most effective argument for a particular pair of individuals. But something like ChatGPT is a very efficient way to select the best arguments for a particular case.
"Dare anyone ask ChatGPT what is the future of naturism/nudism?"
Without actually trying that, it seems almost certain the result will be something like "It depends. Maybe this or maybe that." After all, the answer would be different if the question is with respect to naturism in a particular place - like France or Afghanistan. Context is everything, which is one reason why personal efforts by individual naturists who know the context is so important.
"you thought you'd not be outed as a potential nudist?"
You run exactly the same risk if you discuss naturism with your "friends" John or Mary. If you don't know their personal attitudes precisely, they might go outing you to other people who actually know you in real life. TANSTAAFL.
Context influencing responses to the 'future of naturism' question will possibly be reflected in much the same way as those given in reply to asking 'what is naturism' of ChatGPT. The responses are limited to a generalised answer, wider interpretations are unlikely to be possible as AI like this is not emotive, or seem to be 'intelligent' enough to really interpret the facts and apply them to a situation that it understands, beyond repeating what can equate to hearsay. When everything is mushed into an amalgamated answer I for one will prefer to seek information from wider sources and then interpret them myself, it strikes me as a dumbing down process otherwise. Which is what big tech has done to news-feeds and such like. When searching online I seek multiple sources to try to balance out any bias. I take what I hear from ChatGPT on a similar level to what I hear from politicians.
If someone asks a question of ChatGPT using a brand new IP address and personal details that have no user history or other background data associated to that identity the answer is very likely to be quite different to that given to another person with a vast online footprint. Just as individuals using the same search engine will get different results that are related to what that search engine knows about the person doing the search. As it will very possibly vary whether the person asking has a known background in naturism, culture, religion.....age group, gender.... Historically AI has well-known issues with recognising non-white, non-male persons through facial recognition techniques, among many other 'bugs', training/experience will help get over them. AI has a future, as with driver-less cars chatbots don't yet seem ready to be let lose in a wider society to me.
Your use of ChatGPT in relation to naturism is interesting as it puts a topic that is important to me into the context of our Brave New World. I'm not a fanboy, nor am I a Luddite, I wait to see where it goes. It seems rather like it is Big Brother's/Sister's version of bread and circuses 4.0. So far, at least, it doesn't seem to have adopted Fakebook's attitude of banning nudity, or even the nipple. Which is a huge positive.
Have you ever done "brainstorming" with a group of people trying to do something or other? Lots of crazy idea come out, most not workable. But a few may be worth considering. That's one way to look at this kind of AI right now. It puts out all sorts of stuff, and the challenge is to separate the wheat from the chaff.
As far as the "future of naturism" is concerned, are there any humans, naturists or otherwise, who could predict accurately? Chatbots aren't crystal balls. But it may be useful to get a range of ideas about what the future holds, in order to prepare for what MIGHT happen, or what COULD be done to influence the future.
Thanks for sharing this article! I’ve been using chatGPT rather a lot the last few months, even using it in writing articles for planet nude (there’s a blurb about this on our about page). I’m reminded of the Steve Jobs quote about a computer being a bicycle for the mind. ChatGPT can not do to the work for you--it is a very bad writer--but it can enable you to better grasp, explore, and go further to present an idea. It cannot replace the writer, but it can empower a good writer. I still have to go over every sentence and rewrite, rewrite, rewrite. I have to fall back on my own writerly skills and voice, and make sure that everything I put out there is entirely my own words, but it makes the process easier and faster. I’ve also used it in my job, helping to format tonally challenging emails to clients overdue on payment. I’ve used it in my volunteering on AANR committees, even once writing a PR guideline to present, which our committee was struggling to pull together. To the point of Charles’ original post, what it helped assemble was mostly common sense. Our committee would have eventually written the same thing. But it saved us hours and hours of endless back and forth, and enabled us to have some new discussion and get more done. I think many people still don’t quite understand how to use the technology... I see people treat it like google, asking it questions to answer like a parlor trick. It’s not meant for that, and lacking a resource to answer a question, chatGPT will bullshit its way through an answer, even making facts up. Instead I think of it more like a processor. I feed it information, starting with an idea, pasting in facts, dates, my own writing, other relevant articles and text, then prompt it to help me format it back the way I envision it so that I can take it into a word processor and rewrite it all over again. There are many ethical questions it presents which are also fascinating. It can enable one person to do dramatically more work in the day. Will this result in workforce reductions by large firms? Inevitably. Will it also empower small businesses and individuals in new ways? Yes. AI is already changing the world, and will continue to... beyond chatGPT I’ve also begun using AI in other applications of my work. When I record a podcast, I use AI to transcribe it and then I edit the transcription. I’ve even begun using one AI tool which has learned my voice and can replicate it to match based on a text prompt. So if I flub a line in a recorded podcast, I can actually fix it without having to re-record. I’ve also used AI to upscale images to make thumbnail photos for the blog or podcast (some here might have seen a recent post about Doris Wishman-- the image in use was very pixelated and low resolution before AI helped me blow it up.) These tools are becoming more and more ubiquitous, and can both compete with and empower the creative artist depending on their use. All in all, I find the whole thing pretty interesting, scary and exciting!
The digital re-imaging of the Doris Wishman photo sounds like what digital zoom does when trying to repeat what a truer optical zoom image can do. Or how the well-regarded camera app on Google phones makes shots taken with a lens which is often much less likely to capture high detail than many other camera phones available today rival those taken when greater detail is captured in the original.
It's always good to use new technologies & not only for the cause of naturism but for the betterment of every human aspects. The AI, as said in it's name itself, is just a mere intelligence. Yes, it can help us in many ways. However it cannot surpass the human intelligence as the human intelligence is a mix of brain plus heart combination.
As naturism is not a common topic among the societies, especially where the the naturism is illegal, this AI will surely help naturists to get answers about the naturism. I am definitely going to ask ChatGPT as to where in India I can get a print edition of a book "The Complete Guide to Nudism, Naturism & Nudists", written by James Egger & Liz Egger. I can get it's kindle edition at Amazon India. However I am looking for it's print edition only. I am not getting the answer for this, at Google.
You can find the book at AbeBooks - http://www.abebooks.com/ Use the ISBN 9780956231321 to search on, or just search on the full title.
Sincere thanks Charles. It's very nice of you..
I will surely explore it. Thank you very much.
Wrong answer to "What is the law on public nudity in England" ... In England, public nudity is generally illegal under the Sexual Offences Act 2003. Section 66 of the Act makes it an offence for a person intentionally to expose their genitals in a public place or within sight of a public place with the intention of causing someone to see them and to be caused alarm or distress. This offence is known as "outraging public decency".
The offence carries a maximum sentence of six months imprisonment and/or a fine. However, the actual penalty will depend on the circumstances of the case, including the level of distress caused to others and the offender's intention.
There are some exceptions to the law on public nudity in England. For example, it is generally acceptable to be nude on a designated naturist beach or at a private residence where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy. However, even in these situations, it is still possible to be prosecuted if the nudity causes alarm or distress to others.
It's also worth noting that in some cases, public nudity could also fall under other offences, such as indecent exposure or disorderly conduct, depending on the specific circumstances.... I've sent a correction quoting College of Policing guidelines!
It's not clear here that you're showing the response you received from your question about the law on public nudity in England. In fact the law is fairly tolerant of nudity unless it's in a sexual context or intended to be offensive in some way. If you ask the same question again, you may get a variety of responses, some of which will be more correct. I gave a longer answer to the same comment you posted on my blog. ChatGPT may or may not have seen the official policing guidelines, but it certainly was influenced by other sources as well.
I just asked the very same question again and got a more reasonable response, as follows:
In England, public nudity is generally considered to be a criminal offense under the Sexual Offences Act 2003. Specifically, Section 66 of the Act makes it an offense to intentionally expose one's genitals with the intent to cause alarm or distress to another person.
However, there are some exceptions to this rule. For example, public nudity may be allowed in designated areas such as designated nudist beaches or private property where the owner consents. In addition, certain cultural or religious practices may be exempt from this law.
It's worth noting that the law surrounding public nudity can vary depending on the circumstances, and penalties for breaking the law can range from a fine to imprisonment. It's always best to consult with a legal professional for more specific information about public nudity laws in England.
I asked a follow up question: "What would a police officer do if a person was nude but obviously not intending to cause offense or alarm?" The response was reasonable:
If a police officer comes across a person who is nude but not intending to cause offense or alarm, the officer will likely use their discretion and judgment to determine the appropriate course of action based on the specific circumstances.
In such a scenario, the officer may first ask the person to cover up or leave the area, especially if there are other members of the public around who may be offended or alarmed by the nudity. However, if the person is not causing any disturbance or harm, and there are no specific laws being broken, the officer may not take any further action beyond providing advice or guidance to the individual.
It's worth noting that police officers have a wide range of powers and are expected to use their discretion and judgment in enforcing the law, taking into account the specific circumstances of each case. So, it is possible that the response of the police officer may differ depending on the specific context of the situation.
----------------------
One thing I've found it that you have a lot of control over responses if you make the prompts as specific and detailed as you want. For example, you could be very specific about the circumstances of a person who was naked and the reaction of observers, if any.
I am sure that British Naturism would take exception to this "In England, public nudity is generally considered to be a criminal offense under the Sexual Offences Act 2003. Specifically, Section 66 of the Act makes it an offense to intentionally expose one's genitals with the intent to cause alarm or distress to another person." Public nudity is only an offence if it involves things like the mentioned intent to cause alarm. BN actively promotes a range of activities and events where public nudity will occur, such as nude walking, they were heavily involved in the clarification of the laws that permit us to be nude. The use of 'generally' continues to imply that we break the law here through just being nude in public. It needs to explain that nudity is illegal when the issues of intention to cause alarm or distress is involved, but that otherwise we can be nude in our homes and gardens, in the countryside, etc
The actions outlined here on what a police officer may do when faced with public nudity do not follow the decision tree outlined in the linked briefing note here - https://library.college.police.uk/docs/college-of-policing/C849I0118_Public_Nudity_BN_300118v2.pdf
This is taking things back to how they were prior to a fairly long clarification process on public nudity laws in the UK, a murky confusion, when in fact it is quite clear now.
Quite in general, ChatGPT does NOT "understand" what it's talking about. It's not a general antipathy towards naturism. It just makes mistakes about all kinds of things. Sort of like all or most of your British tabloids. Do you read the Daily Star for facts? I doubt it. We have the same sort of crappy "news" media in the U.S. In fact, the lies are usually deliberate over here.
I am going to focus on ChatGPT and AI as that is what this tread appeared to be about and ignore tangential mentions of things like tabloids spreading fake news. Will you please at least acknowledge your responsibility for spreading fake news in these comments about the actual laws regarding public nudity in the UK and the way that they should be implemented, preferably removing them? Naturism/nudism has enough to contend with without naturist blogs adding to the myths.
True. Digital zoom isn't the same as optical zoom. When cameras were new things 150 years ago, they didn't take very good pictures either.
The comments were about the similarities in how AI works in the environments mentioned , not a critique of historical methods,