top of page
  • Writer's pictureKlaus Luehning

ON THE MARKETING OF VERIFIEDHUMAN™ | Human vs. AI: Distinctive Qualities & Responsibilities

TAKEAWAYS:
  1. Distinguishing Between Human and AI: The differentiation between human and AI should not be seen as a competition but as a choice based on the distinct qualities and limitations of each.

  2. The Richness of Human Experience: Humans possess a complexity and richness in their existence, shaped by experiences, emotions, and individuality, that AI cannot replicate.

  3. Mandatory Disclosure for AI Content: AI-generated content should carry a clear "watermark" or label indicating its artificial origin to prevent deception and ensure responsible use. Regulators should enforce broadcasting standards to prevent misuse of AI-generated content.

 
VerifiedHuman

The marketing of VERIFIEDHUMAN™ should not be a competition for dominance, or as an alternate or as a substitute, but as a choice between a naturally occurring organism known as a homo sapien and a contrived computer algorithm that has no conscience or moral center and no emotional context. The lack of the foregoing gives an AI presentation a flatness, a feeling of some inappropriateness (error) that appears fake to an aware and mindful person.


On the other hand, a sophisticated algorithmic program would feel inhuman in the way of being a "cold fish" with unsupported or lacking the emotional variation of a person in the flesh.​A human being is a protoplasmic lump needy for air, water, and sustenance on an almost continual basis for a short life, with variations in type, kind, and function, different than any other person (now 9+ billion) in all their activities. This richness of substance and its variations makes human beings human. AI reflects moments in time unaltered by experience, background, cultural overtones, emotional drives, and life choices; it lacks a historic development maturation of each person's personality. 


As AI continues to develop and going back to time zero, it should have a self-identifying "watermark" in its presentation that the material being offered, for whatever reason and in whatever form, indicates that it is a manufactured display, and not in any way meant to be real, accurate, or indicate the need for any action. It may be informative, related to actions to take in case of need, as entertainment, or other benign use. The broadcasting of such material should be regulated to broadcasting standards as currently mandated by the FCC or similar agencies to ferret out obvious incitements to fear and editing for content over and above current law. The conflict with freedom of speech is that some can be published under the guidance of self-revealing identification but cannot be used in any deceptive way to hide their source.



+ BLOG

bottom of page