When I heard Representative Al Novstrup (R-3/Aberdeen) introduce his speech in favor of House Bill 1068 on the House floor as a product of artificial intelligence and not his own work (really: see the SDPB video from Thursday, February 5, timestamp 59:00), I was too focused on documenting the absurdity his other caucus members were spewing about ivermectin and medical expertise to really dig into my former neighbor’s reliance on artificial intelligence to do his job for him.
However, it occurs to me (me, not an algorithm, because as I’ve promised, unlike Rep. Novstrup, I do my own thinking and writing) that Novstrup’s laziness deserves a post of its own.
The biggest challenge is picking one good opening line… so I’ll give you ten:
- AI Novstrup: that second letter isn’t a small L but a capital I!
- (R-3/Aberdeen): the R stands for Robot!
- Novstrup has given some robotic speeches, but now he’s taking it too far.
- I liked AI better when he got his talking points from his caucus, not from SkyNet.
- In the 20th century, Al said his dog ate his homework. In the 21st century, Al says a robot barfs up his homework.
- Maybe Al gets his speeches from the same machine that cuts his hair.
- Artificial intelligence is notoriously biased against racial minorities, so Al and A.I. are a perfect fit.
- Is Al transitioning from male to robot? If so, will he ask the LRC to let him shower and change in the server room?
- How does Al think he can get by with using a robot to write his speeches? His party doesn’t even accept using a robot to write signatures!
- Artificial intelligence: when you lack natural intelligence, it’s the only way to go!
However much zing you think I managed in those ten options, Representative Novstrup’s opening line on HB 1068 had less: “This is not my knowledge. This is artificial intelligence, and you always gotta be skeptical, but you also gotta at least give it consideration.”
No, Al, we don’t at least gotta give A.I.-generated text consideration. A teacher receiving a paper marked “generated by ChatGPT” would be perfectly justified in handing the paper back without further review and demanding authentic work from the student. Judges are throwing out AI-generated briefs and fining attorneys for letting robots do their jobs. In a setting as serious and consequential as the Legislature, we are perfectly justified in disregarding robot talk and giving weight only to the honest arguments of honest voting members.
We expect legislators to bring their human knowledge and wisdom to bear on every bill they debate. Representative Novstrup prefaced his AI commentary with, “I don’t have enough information to have an opinion…. Most of you know my profession. I’m not qualified to know the answer.” If that’s the case, Novstrup shouldn’t have risen to speak in the first place. He should have left the floor open to elected humans to offer speak from their own knowledge and judgment rather than letting an unidentified, unaccountable, unthinking statistical language model usurp floor time.
Representative Novstrup already handed any opponent in the primary or the general an easy campaign line with his pitch to increase his Legislative pay (House State Affairs killed that measure on Friday). Now he’s setting himself up for bruising from any willing opponent: “Hey, Aberdeen, I don’t need a robot to tell me how to vote, and neither do you. Elect a person, not ChatGPT.”
The elder of the Novstrups, Mr. Al, has always sported a very sweet coif. grudznick abides the hair, but other than selling decent go cart rides and dominating elections in the District numbered 3, Mr. Novstrup has accomplished very little in the legislatures.
Remember when Mr. Dennert in the neighboring district dominated the Aberdonians? Mr. Dennert was a Democrat and as swell a fellow as any could find.
https://monsha.ai/blog/7-best-free-ai-courses-for-teachers-and-educators