“Disclaimer: The use of artificial intelligence was not used in the creation of this work. This was entirely by human creation”
Or would it be kind of pointless, since nobody could truly prove that they didn’t use AI, or in fact the use of AI would be totally normalized (even though I think there will always be some human desire to read or watch something that was 100% only human-made)
I think only a small but very vocal minority care if a work contains AI or not (as long as the work is of good enough quality) and in the long run their complaints will be irrelevant.
I think it would be about as popular for movies as disclaimers saying that a movie was made without the use of digital effects (i.e., not very).
It would probably just be a lie, like like how Tom Cruise lied about how there was no CGI on the jets in Top Gun, even though it was totally saturated with CGI.
Maybe it would win over some viewers despite being totally false.
I like original work. MSFT co-pilot very helpfully provides cites so you can look at the source material.
That’s not even a disclaimer. A disclaimer would be admitting that AI was used. “This work contains no AI” is just a claimer.
It may have something to do with the new WGA contract, which contains a number of protections against AI.
It doesn’t have anything to do with anything other than Velocity’s speculation. It doesn’t actually come from anywhere.
I’d prefer an admission that it was used, at least for books and papers. With penalties if it was used and not so noted.
But it will depend on the market. If publishers and readers don’t buy things from people who lie, that would help.