# Writers Guild of America goes on strike (5/2/23) tentative deal (9/25/23) Now accepted (10/9/23) **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Tags:** ai\ **Created:** [May 2, 2023, 4:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/writers-guild-of-america-goes-on-strike-5-2-23-tentative-deal-9-25-23-now-accepted-10-9-23/983448 "2023-05-02T04:36:31Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 20
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2023, 3:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/writers-guild-of-america-goes-on-strike-5-2-23-tentative-deal-9-25-23-now-accepted-10-9-23/983448/381 "2023-09-21T03:28:05Z")
> [@Banquet\_Bear](#): > > …I asked chatGPT to tell me about getting up in the morning. Since ChatGPT has somehow entered this conversation, I wonder if you could share with us exactly what question prompted that bizarre response. I just asked ChatGPT, literally, “tell me about getting up in the morning”, and just got some common-sense advice about how to best prepare for the day. Nothing at all like what you posted. Are you doing something you’re not telling us here in the way you might be intentionally skewing the question? ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2023, 3:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/writers-guild-of-america-goes-on-strike-5-2-23-tentative-deal-9-25-23-now-accepted-10-9-23/983448/382 "2023-09-21T03:37:27Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > Are you doing something you’re not telling us here in the way you might be intentionally skewing the question? …of course! > [@chatGPT](#): > > PROMPT: I’m trying to explain to someone that I posted a conversation from chatgpt as a joke to illustrate a larger point. Can you explain this in the form of a standard operating procedure > > CHAT: > **Standard Operating Procedure (SOP)** **Title** : Posting a ChatGPT Conversation as a Joke for Illustrative Purposes > > **Objective** : To explain the process of posting a conversation generated by ChatGPT as a humorous illustration to support a broader argument or point in a discussion. > > **Scope** : This SOP applies to individuals using ChatGPT in online conversations or discussions. > > **Responsibilities** : > > - User: The individual intending to post the ChatGPT conversation as a joke. > - Audience: The participants or readers of the online conversation or discussion. > - Platform: The social media platform or medium where the conversation will be posted. > > **Procedure** : > > 1. **Contextualize the Conversation** : Ensure that the ChatGPT-generated conversation is relevant to the larger point or argument you want to illustrate. The conversation should serve as an example or anecdote that supports your position. > 2. **Obtain the ChatGPT Conversation** : Retrieve the ChatGPT conversation you wish to use. This can be done by accessing a saved conversation or by generating a new one, depending on the situation. > 3. **Review and Edit (if necessary)**: > > - Carefully review the conversation to ensure it aligns with your intended message. > - Edit any sensitive or inappropriate content to maintain a respectful and considerate tone, especially if the conversation involves controversial topics. > > 1. **Create a Contextualizing Post** : > > - Craft a brief introductory post or comment that sets the stage for the ChatGPT conversation. Explain the purpose of sharing it and how it relates to your argument or point. > > 1. **Share the Conversation** : > > - On the selected platform, post your introductory message along with the ChatGPT conversation. > - Ensure the formatting is clear and easy to read, and consider using quotation marks or other formatting to distinguish the conversation from your commentary. > > 1. **Engage Responsively** : > > - Be prepared to engage with comments, questions, or reactions from your audience. > - Maintain a constructive and respectful tone in your responses to any feedback or inquiries. > > 1. **Monitor and Adjust** : > > - Keep an eye on the discussion and be open to adjusting your approach if necessary. If the joke is misinterpreted or causing confusion, be ready to clarify its purpose. > > 1. **Respect Platform Rules and Guidelines** : > > - Ensure that your post complies with the rules and guidelines of the platform where you are sharing the content. This includes adhering to community standards and policies. > > 1. **Evaluate Impact** : > > - After posting, assess how effectively the ChatGPT conversation served to illustrate your point or argument. Consider whether it achieved the desired outcome in the discussion. > > 1. **Adapt for Future Use** : > > - Based on the results and feedback, adapt your approach for future discussions or posts involving ChatGPT-generated content. > > **Conclusion** : By following this SOP, you can effectively use a ChatGPT conversation as a joke to illustrate a larger point in online discussions while ensuring clarity, respect, and adherence to platform guidelines. So in regards to step 7: was there anything else you needed clearing up? Or are we good? ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2023, 3:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/writers-guild-of-america-goes-on-strike-5-2-23-tentative-deal-9-25-23-now-accepted-10-9-23/983448/383 "2023-09-21T03:52:21Z")
Sorry, neither the “joke” nor the basis of the original alleged ChatGPT post makes any sense. Your response **[here](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/writers-guild-of-america-goes-on-strike-5-2-23/983448/377)** was presented as a genuine response from ChatGPT. If it was just something you made up as an attempt at sarcasm, at the very least it violated board ethics about intentional misrepresentation. ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2023, 4:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/writers-guild-of-america-goes-on-strike-5-2-23-tentative-deal-9-25-23-now-accepted-10-9-23/983448/384 "2023-09-21T04:04:53Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > Your response **[here](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/writers-guild-of-america-goes-on-strike-5-2-23/983448/377)** was presented as a genuine response from ChatGPT. …it _was_ a genuine response from ChatGPT. > [@wolfpup](#): > > If it was just something you made up as an attempt at sarcasm, at the very least it violated board ethics about intentional misrepresentation. It wasn’t something I made up as an attempt at sarcasm. Any other questions? Novelty\_Bobble took a sentence that I wrote and claimed “If that isn’t treating the process like a production line then I don’t know what is.” My point, is that you can make _anything_ look like it is part of a production line if you want. Even getting up in the morning, washing teeth, and having breakfast. That single sentence of mine they quoted doesn’t indicate that I think the writers room is “just a production line.” I’ve written at length what value I think the writer’s room adds to a production. If you think I’ve violated board ethics about intentional misrepresentation then report me. But it was a straight copy-and-paste from ChatGPT. I clearly labeled it so. I followed all of the standard operating procedures _including_ > [@chatGPT](#): > > Ensure that your post complies with the rules and guidelines of the platform where you are sharing the content. This includes adhering to community standards and policies. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2023, 4:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/writers-guild-of-america-goes-on-strike-5-2-23-tentative-deal-9-25-23-now-accepted-10-9-23/983448/385 "2023-09-21T04:12:43Z")
That’s fair. But then I reiterate my previous question: > I wonder if you could share with us exactly what question prompted that bizarre response. I just asked ChatGPT, literally, “tell me about getting up in the morning”, and just got some common-sense advice about how to best prepare for the day. Nothing at all like what you posted. It now sounds like you were prompting ChatGPT to produce a particular style of scripted response in order to prove whatever point you were arguing. As I said, this is not the type of response it would normally produce. ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2023, 4:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/writers-guild-of-america-goes-on-strike-5-2-23-tentative-deal-9-25-23-now-accepted-10-9-23/983448/386 "2023-09-21T04:21:40Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > t now sounds like you were prompting ChatGPT to produce a particular style of scripted response in order to prove whatever point you were arguing. …yes! I just said that! I even posted a lengthy explanation from ChatGPT that went step-by-step explaining exactly what I did!!! And it demonstrates a larger point. Because I did _the exact same thing you did_ earlier in the thread where you cited chatGPT but you also _didn’t include your prompt_. The response you posted didn’t contain accurate information. And the reason why it wasn’t accurate was because you were asking it the _wrong question_. It’s why chatGPT isn’t really good for anything except light entertainment. It _certainly_ shouldn’t be used as an authoritative cite. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2023, 4:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/writers-guild-of-america-goes-on-strike-5-2-23-tentative-deal-9-25-23-now-accepted-10-9-23/983448/387 "2023-09-21T04:32:35Z")
> [@Banquet\_Bear](#): > > And it demonstrates a larger point. Because I did _the exact same thing you did_ earlier in the thread where you cited chatGPT but you also _didn’t include your prompt_. The response you posted didn’t contain accurate information. And the reason why it wasn’t accurate was because you were asking it the _wrong question_. It’s why chatGPT isn’t really good for anything except light entertainment. This is completely wrong and stems entirely from your imagination. I fortunately still have that original ChatGPT conversation, and here it is complete with my prompt and the initial part of the response: > **Are script writers usually on the sets of TV and film productions?** > > ChatGPT: > > Scriptwriters are not typically on the sets of TV and film productions once the script has been finalized and shooting begins. The scriptwriting process usually involves multiple stages, including concept development, writing, revisions, and approval. Once the script is approved and shooting begins, the scriptwriter’s role is often finished, and the responsibility for bringing the script to life falls on the director, actors, and the production team. > … It seems that ChatGPT didn’t have an understanding of the nuance between TV and film, much as I and some others lacked that appreciation. But the error in the response wasn’t due to any dishonesty on my part. I just asked a straightforward question. And I acknowledged long ago (here and in other threads) that ChatGPT can indeed get things wrong and doesn’t have any confidence filters (like, for instance, IBM’s DeepQA does) to mitigate potential mistakes. But I might add that it’s bullshit to suggest that it’s in no way a search engine, as some have said, because that exact same technology is being used in real-time internet Bing search. It just needs a lot of safeguards and refinement to be a reliable search engine. ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2023, 4:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/writers-guild-of-america-goes-on-strike-5-2-23-tentative-deal-9-25-23-now-accepted-10-9-23/983448/388 "2023-09-21T04:40:45Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > But the error in the response wasn’t due to any dishonesty on my part. …I never implied dishonesty. You obviously posted in good faith. > [@wolfpup](#): > > because that exact same technology is being used in real-time internet Bing search. And as a person who builds websites now, the encroachment of AI into search engines and the SEO space is causing me headaches. But we are getting off-topic. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Novelty\_Bobble](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Novelty\_Bobble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Novelty_Bobble)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2023, 6:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/writers-guild-of-america-goes-on-strike-5-2-23-tentative-deal-9-25-23-now-accepted-10-9-23/983448/389 "2023-09-21T06:29:06Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > Noone should be unable to make a living at a job they’re competent at. No-one is talking about being _bad_ at a job (which is wholly subjective in this case anyway). But it is ludicrous to suggest that I _deserve_ to be employed in _any_ job, whatever my competence level. There simply may not be the need for those positions. Are we going to force companies to take on more people than they actually need? (The writers union of course are saying “yes” to that) Once I _am_ employed then it is perfectly reasonable to expect a living wage. If I had to guess I’d Maher is agreeing with both those positions. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2023, 6:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/writers-guild-of-america-goes-on-strike-5-2-23-tentative-deal-9-25-23-now-accepted-10-9-23/983448/390 "2023-09-21T06:45:19Z")
> [@Novelty\_Bobble](#): > > Are we going to force companies to take on more people than they actually need? I think you’ll find that a company’s idea of how many people they “need” is almost universally at odds with what their customers and employees know that they need, and that applies to writers just as much as it does to fast food companies who think they can replace cashiers and grill crew with a touchscreen attached to a card reader and a robot that flips patties. ---
**Author:** ![Novelty\_Bobble](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Novelty\_Bobble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Novelty_Bobble)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2023, 6:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/writers-guild-of-america-goes-on-strike-5-2-23-tentative-deal-9-25-23-now-accepted-10-9-23/983448/391 "2023-09-21T06:51:06Z")
> [@Banquet\_Bear](#): > > …I asked chatGPT to tell me about getting up in the morning. why did you do that? What possible relevance does that have to your simplistic interpretation of the creative process? > [@Banquet\_Bear](#): > > ” I’ll ask you the question again: when you looked back, what shows were you thinking about that had mandated minimum number of writers? I looked back thinking that there was _never_ a time when such requirements were in place, I had no specific shows in mind and never expected to find any. Lo and behold I couldn’t find any. I couldn’t find any evidence that any such rules were used. Yet with full freedom to choose the numbers of writers needed we still see a long history of popular and high quality work. You were the one making the tenous implication that old series of “Suits” are somehow superior to current shows and that it has something to do with having a number of writers above what you consider to be a necessary minumum. I don’t find that convincing. > [@Banquet\_Bear](#): > > This isn’t an argument against anything I said. The WGA are well aware of the existence of this thing called a “deadline.” It’s a basic part of doing the job. Its the showrunners responsibility to manage the room, to prevent their writers from being exploited or being overworked. So you trust the company _not_ to exploit the workers through workplace practices and feel no need to have rules in place against it, but in the same breath think that the company _cannot_ be trusted to not exploit the workers through undermanning and therefore have to put rules in place to guard against it? > [@Banquet\_Bear](#): > > What guidelines do you suggest? I’ve already given examples of those upthread. > [@Banquet\_Bear](#): > > And why wouldn’t you both have these guidelines _and_ have mandatory minimum staffing? Because, as has been explained to you, only one of those approaches actually gives legal power to prevent exploitation. If you have the former there is no need to implement the latter. ---
**Author:** ![Novelty\_Bobble](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Novelty\_Bobble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Novelty_Bobble)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2023, 7:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/writers-guild-of-america-goes-on-strike-5-2-23-tentative-deal-9-25-23-now-accepted-10-9-23/983448/392 "2023-09-21T07:04:21Z")
> [@Banquet\_Bear](#): > > Novelty\_Bobble took a sentence that I wrote and claimed “If that isn’t treating the process like a production line then I don’t know what is.” My simple point was that you _cannot_ treat the productivity of a creative process as if it were a production line. With known rates of production, resource levels and simplistic output calculations. Which is what _you_ were doing. You can rarely make such predictions for even any purely physical manufacturing process beyond the extremely simple. For someone who claims knowledge of the creative world I’m surprised you’d think that approach applies there. Your introduction of ChatGPT is distracting and irrelevant to the point. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2023, 7:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/writers-guild-of-america-goes-on-strike-5-2-23-tentative-deal-9-25-23-now-accepted-10-9-23/983448/393 "2023-09-21T07:10:49Z")
> [@Novelty\_Bobble](#): > > But it is ludicrous to suggest that I _deserve_ to be employed in _any_ job, whatever my competence level. There simply may not be the need for those positions. The only people suggesting that are people, such as Bill Maher, making bad faith arguments against the writers guild’s actual position. ---
**Author:** ![Novelty\_Bobble](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Novelty\_Bobble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Novelty_Bobble)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2023, 7:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/writers-guild-of-america-goes-on-strike-5-2-23-tentative-deal-9-25-23-now-accepted-10-9-23/983448/394 "2023-09-21T07:10:59Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > I think you’ll find that a company’s idea of how many people they “need” is almost universally at odds with what their customers and employees know that they need, and that applies to writers just as much as it does to fast food companies who think they can replace cashiers and grill crew with a touchscreen attached to a card reader and a robot that flips patties. I’m sure it is at odds. As customers I’m sure we’d all like immediate service of the highest possible standard in exactly the way we demand. Is it a good idea to force companies to employee people just to accommodate _those_ demands? Or do we allow them freedom to employ what they need in order to maintain a level of service that keeps customers satisfied enough to retain them as customers? ---
**Author:** ![Novelty\_Bobble](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Novelty\_Bobble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Novelty_Bobble)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2023, 7:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/writers-guild-of-america-goes-on-strike-5-2-23-tentative-deal-9-25-23-now-accepted-10-9-23/983448/395 "2023-09-21T07:16:15Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > The only people suggesting that are people, such as Bill Maher, making bad faith arguments against the writers guild’s actual position. Smapti said > [@Smapti](#): > > Noone should be unable to make a living at a job they’re competent at. Which is what I (and apparently you) disagree with and where my comment was directed. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2023, 7:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/writers-guild-of-america-goes-on-strike-5-2-23-tentative-deal-9-25-23-now-accepted-10-9-23/983448/396 "2023-09-21T07:23:46Z")
> [@Novelty\_Bobble](#): > > Which is what I (and apparently you) disagree with and where my comment was directed. No, I agree entirely with Smapti, and disagree emphatically with your characterization of his meaning. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2023, 7:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/writers-guild-of-america-goes-on-strike-5-2-23-tentative-deal-9-25-23-now-accepted-10-9-23/983448/397 "2023-09-21T07:25:11Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > Noone should be unable to make a living at a job they’re **competent** _(emphasis mine)_ at. > [@Novelty\_Bobble](#): > > But it is ludicrous to suggest that I _deserve_ to be employed in _any_ job, whatever my **competence** _(also emphasis mine)_ level. Why, it’s almost as if you’re ignoring a key word. > [@Novelty\_Bobble](#): > > Is it a good idea to force companies to employee people just to accommodate _those_ demands? In general, yes, I’d say it is a good idea for companies to do things that make their customers happy. ---
**Author:** ![Novelty\_Bobble](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Novelty\_Bobble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Novelty_Bobble)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2023, 7:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/writers-guild-of-america-goes-on-strike-5-2-23-tentative-deal-9-25-23-now-accepted-10-9-23/983448/398 "2023-09-21T07:41:16Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > Why, it’s almost as if you’re ignoring a key word. I’m ignoring a key word by specifically using it? That’s one interpetation I guess. but I see where my wording may leave room for interpretation. Where I say “whatever my competence level” I thought I was clearly referring to your expressed level of “competent” or even higher. But it could be clearer so… Let me re-state exactly what I mean > [@Novelty\_Bobble](#): > > But it is ludicrous to suggest that I _deserve_ to be employed in _any_ job, even though I may be “competent” or even better than “competent”. ---
**Author:** ![Novelty\_Bobble](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Novelty\_Bobble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Novelty_Bobble)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2023, 7:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/writers-guild-of-america-goes-on-strike-5-2-23-tentative-deal-9-25-23-now-accepted-10-9-23/983448/399 "2023-09-21T07:43:43Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > In general, yes, I’d say it is a good idea for companies to do things that make their customers happy. The key word is “force” here. Would you suggest we do that? That’s the general principle I’m interested in. Mandated staffing levels. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2023, 8:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/writers-guild-of-america-goes-on-strike-5-2-23-tentative-deal-9-25-23-now-accepted-10-9-23/983448/400 "2023-09-21T08:02:53Z")
> [@Novelty\_Bobble](#): > > The key word is “force” here. Would you suggest we do that? Yes, I would. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/writers-guild-of-america-goes-on-strike-5-2-23-tentative-deal-9-25-23-now-accepted-10-9-23/983448.md?page=19) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/writers-guild-of-america-goes-on-strike-5-2-23-tentative-deal-9-25-23-now-accepted-10-9-23/983448.md?page=21)