Recently, Susan Zhuang, a legislator from New York City who represents the southern part of the city, came under fire from the New York Post for using artificial intelligence (AI) to assist with translation.
When the New York Post posed the question, “What makes someone a New Yorker?” to the politician in New York City, many became wary of her response.
“Dreams come true in New York City—the concrete jungle.” It’s a state of mind rather than just a location. The response stated that “having an unstoppable hustle, unbreakable resilience, and unrivaled independence means being a New Yorker.”
After that, the New York Post ran the message using Copyleak to see whether it resembled any AI responses. It found 99% of them, indicating that the response she provided was artificial intelligence (AI) generated.
As Brooklyn’s first Chinese-American councilwoman, Zhuang initially denied the use of AI and placed the blame on her teammates. However, she later withdrew her statement after texting a reporter, saying, “As an immigrant and like many of my fellow immigrants, use AI as a tool to help foster deeper understanding as well as for personal growth, particularly when English is not my primary language.”
While competitors ran on this statement, it caused some anxiety for those who voted for her. How can we expect her to serve the district if she is incapable of providing independent answers to questions? “Is she planning to utilize computers and the internet to draft her bills as well?” asks Ying Tan, the candidate who challenged Susan Zhuang.
Some did argue that, similar to many other politicians, this wouldn’t have changed much that much if she had had a staff worker write it. Certain individuals expressed that the issue lay more with her failure to proofread and alter it to sound authentic, rather than her initial usage of AI.
What difference does it make if this is written by an AI or a staff member? Otherwise, it’s a differentiation without a difference, and the councilwoman ought to have gone back and made sure it was in her voice clearly.”
Many have expressed disbelief at her use of AI, speculating that it may be the future of both answering journalistic queries and crafting speeches for politicians.
