A.I. Chatbots Defeated Doctors at Diagnosing Illness; The New York Times, November 17, 2024

Gina Kolata , The New York Times; A.I. Chatbots Defeated Doctors at Diagnosing Illness

"Instead, in a study Dr. Rodman helped design, doctors who were given ChatGPT-4 along with conventional resources did only slightly better than doctors who did not have access to the bot. And, to the researchers’ surprise, ChatGPT alone outperformed the doctors.

“I was shocked,” Dr. Rodman said.

The chatbot, from the company OpenAI, scored an average of 90 percent when diagnosing a medical condition from a case report and explaining its reasoning. Doctors randomly assigned to use the chatbot got an average score of 76 percent. Those randomly assigned not to use it had an average score of 74 percent.

The study showed more than just the chatbot’s superior performance.

It unveiled doctors’ sometimes unwavering belief in a diagnosis they made, even when a chatbot potentially suggests a better one."

What AI knows about you; Axios, November 4, 2024

Ina Friend, Axios; What AI knows about you

"Most AI builders don't say where they are getting the data they use to train their bots and models — but legally they're required to say what they are doing with their customers' data.

The big picture: These data-use disclosures open a window onto the otherwise opaque world of Big Tech's AI brain-food fight.

• In this new Axios series, we'll tell you, company by company, what all the key players are saying and doing with your personal information and content.

Why it matters: You might be just fine knowing that picture you just posted on Instagram is helping train the next generative AI art engine. But you might not — or you might just want to be choosier about what you share.

Zoom out: AI makers need an incomprehensibly gigantic amount of raw data to train their large language and image models. 

• The industry's hunger has led to a data land grab: Companies are vying to teach their baby AIs using information sucked in from many different sources — sometimes with the owner's permission, often without it — before new laws and court rulings make that harder. 

Zoom in: Each Big Tech giant is building generative AI models, and many of them are using their customer data, in part, to train them.

• In some cases it's opt-in, meaning your data won't be used unless you agree to it. In other cases it is opt-out, meaning your information will automatically get used unless you explicitly say no. 
• These rules can vary by region, thanks to legal differences. For instance, Meta's Facebook and Instagram are "opt-out" — but you can only opt out if you live in Europe or Brazil.
• In the U.S., California's data privacy law is among the laws responsible for requiring firms to say what they do with user data. In the EU, it's the GDPR."

Mother says AI chatbot led her son to kill himself in lawsuit against its maker; The Guardian, October 23, 2024

Blake Montgomery , The Guardian; Mother says AI chatbot led her son to kill himself in lawsuit against its maker

"The mother of a teenager who killed himself after becoming obsessed with an artificial intelligence-powered chatbot now accuses its maker of complicity in his death.

Megan Garcia filed a civil suit against Character.ai, which makes a customizable chatbot for role-playing, in Florida federal court on Wednesday, alleging negligence, wrongful death and deceptive trade practices. Her son Sewell Setzer III, 14, died in Orlando, Florida, in February. In the months leading up to his death, Setzer used the chatbot day and night, according to Garcia."

Penguin Random House underscores copyright protection in AI rebuff; The Bookseller, October 18, 2024

  MATILDA BATTERSBY, The Bookseller; Penguin Random House underscores copyright protection in AI rebuff

"The world’s biggest trade publisher has changed the wording on its copyright pages to help protect authors’ intellectual property from being used to train large language models (LLMs) and other artificial intelligence (AI) tools, The Bookseller can exclusively reveal.

Penguin Random House (PRH) has amended its copyright wording across all imprints globally, confirming it will appear “in imprint pages across our markets”. The new wording states: “No part of this book may be used or reproduced in any manner for the purpose of training artificial intelligence technologies or systems”, and will be included in all new titles and any backlist titles that are reprinted.

The statement also “expressly reserves [the titles] from the text and data mining exception”, in accordance with a European Parliament directive.

The move specifically to ban the use of its titles by AI firms for the development of chatbots and other digital tools comes amid a slew of copyright infringement cases in the US and reports that large tranches of pirated books have already been used by tech companies to train AI tools. In 2024, several academic publishers including Taylor & Francis, Wiley and Sage have announced partnerships to license content to AI firms.

PRH is believed to be the first of the Big Five anglophone trade publishers to amend its copyright information to reflect the acceleration of AI systems and the alleged reliance by tech companies on using published work to train language models."

Millions of people are creating nude images of pretty much anyone in minutes using AI bots in a ‘nightmarish scenario’; New York Post, October 15, 2024

 Brooke Kate, New York Post; Millions of people are creating nude images of pretty much anyone in minutes using AI bots in a ‘nightmarish scenario’

"Online chatbots are generating nude images of real people at users’ requests, prompting concern from experts who worry the explicit deepfakes will create “a very nightmarish scenario.”

A Wired investigation on the messaging app Telegram unearthed dozens of AI-powered chatbots that allegedly “create explicit photos or videos of people with only a couple clicks,” the outlet reported. Some “remove clothes” from images provided by users, according to Wired, while others say they can manufacture X-rated photos of people engaging in sexual activity.

The outlet estimated that approximately 4 million users per month take advantage of the deepfake capabilities from the chatbots, of which there were an estimated 50. Such generative AI bots promised to deliver “anything you want about the face or clothes of the photo you give me,” Wired reported."

Anyone Can Turn You Into an AI Chatbot. There's Little You Can Do to Stop Them.; Wired, October 15, 2024

Megan Farokhmanesh, Lauren Goode, Wired; Anyone Can Turn You Into an AI Chatbot. There's Little You Can Do to Stop Them.

His daughter was murdered. Then she reappeared as an AI chatbot.; The Washington Post, October 15, 2024

Daniel Wu , The Washington Post; His daughter was murdered. Then she reappeared as an AI chatbot.

"Jennifer’s name and image had been used to create a chatbot on Character.AI, a website that allows users to converse with digital personalities made using generative artificial intelligence. Several people had interacted with the digital Jennifer, which was created by a user on Character’s website, according to a screenshot of her chatbot’s now-deleted profile.

Crecente, who has spent the years since his daughter’s death running a nonprofit organization in her name to prevent teen dating violence, said he was appalled that Character had allowed a user to create a facsimile of a murdered high-schooler without her family’s permission. Experts said the incident raises concerns about the AI industry’s ability — or willingness — to shield users from the potential harms of a service that can deal in troves of sensitive personal information...

The company’s terms of service prevent users from impersonating any person or entity...

AI chatbots can engage in conversation and be programmed to adopt the personalities and biographical details of specific characters, real or imagined. They have found a growing audience online as AI companies market the digital companions as friends, mentors and romantic partners...

Rick Claypool, who researched AI chatbots for the nonprofit consumer advocacy organization Public Citizen, said while laws governing online content at large could apply to AI companies, they have largely been left to regulate themselves. Crecente isn’t the first grieving parent to have their child’s information manipulated by AI: Content creators on TikTok have used AI to imitate the voices and likenesses of missing children and produce videos of them narrating their deaths, to outrage from the children’s families, The Post reported last year.

“We desperately need for lawmakers and regulators to be paying attention to the real impacts these technologies are having on their constituents,” Claypool said. “They can’t just be listening to tech CEOs about what the policies should be … they have to pay attention to the families and individuals who have been harmed.”

I Quit Teaching Because of ChatGPT; Time, September 30, 2024

 Victoria Livingstone, Time; I Quit Teaching Because of ChatGPT

"Students who outsource their writing to AI lose an opportunity to think more deeply about their research. In a recent article on art and generative AI, author Ted Chiang put it this way: “Using ChatGPT to complete assignments is like bringing a forklift into the weight room; you will never improve your cognitive fitness that way.” Chiang also notes that the hundreds of small choices we make as writers are just as important as the initial conception. Chiang is a writer of fiction, but the logic applies equally to scholarly writing. Decisions regarding syntax, vocabulary, and other elements of style imbue a text with meaning nearly as much as the underlying research...

Generative AI is, in some ways, a democratizing tool...

The best educators will adapt to AI. In some ways, the changes will be positive. Teachers must move away from mechanical activities or assigning simple summaries. They will find ways to encourage students to think critically and learn that writing is a way of generating ideas, revealing contradictions, and clarifying methodologies.

However, those lessons require that students be willing to sit with the temporary discomfort of not knowing. Students must learn to move forward with faith in their own cognitive abilities as they write and revise their way into clarity. With few exceptions, my students were not willing to enter those uncomfortable spaces or remain there long enough to discover the revelatory power of writing."

Fake Cases, Real Consequences [No digital link as of 10/1/24]; ABA Journal, Oct./Nov. 2024 Issue

John Roemer, ABA Journal; Fake Cases, Real Consequences [No digital link as of 10/1/24]

"Legal commentator Eugene Volokh, a professor at UCLA School of Law who tracks AI in litigation, in February reported on the 14th court case he's found in which AI-hallucinated false citations appeared. It was a Missouri Court of Appeals opinion that assessed the offending appellant $10,000 in damages for a frivolous filing.

Hallucinations aren't the only snag, Volokh says. "It's also with the output mischaracterizing the precedents or omitting key context. So one still has to check that output to make sure it's sound, rather than just including it in one's papers.

Echoing Volokh and other experts, ChatGPT itself seems clear-eyed about its limits. When asked about hallucinations in legal research, it replied in part: "Hallucinations in chatbot answers could potentially pose a problem for lawyers if they relied solely on the information provided by the chatbot without verifying its accuracy."

Should You Be Allowed to Profit From A.I.-Generated Art?; The New York Times, September 27, 2024

Kwame Anthony Appiah, The New York Times; Should You Be Allowed to Profit From A.I.-Generated Art?

[Excerpt]

"We attempt to attribute art whenever we can, and anything that’s only for purchase we either avoid or pay for. This particular piece seems to be available only in an Etsy shop, where the creator apparently uses A.I. prompts to generate images. The price is nominal: a few dollars. Yet I cannot help thinking that those who make A.I.-generated art are taking other artists’ work, essentially recreating it and then profiting from it. 

I’m not sure what the best move is...Name Withheld

From the Ethicist:

There’s a sense in which A.I. image generators — such as DALL-E 3, Midjourney and Stable Diffusion — make use of the intellectual property of the artists whose work they’ve been trained on. But the same is true of human artists. The history of art is the history of people borrowing and adapting techniques and tropes from earlier work, with occasional moments of deep originality...

Maybe you’re worried that A.I. image generators will undermine the value of human-made art. Such concerns have a long history. In his classic 1935 essay, ‘‘The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction,’’ the critic Walter Benjamin pointed out that techniques for reproducing artworks have been invented throughout history. In antiquity, the Greeks had foundries for reproducing bronzes; in time, woodcuts were widely used to make multiple copies of images; etching, lithography and photography later added new possibilities. These technologies raised the question of what Benjamin called the ‘‘aura’’ of the individual artwork...

As forms of artificial intelligence grow increasingly widespread, we need to get used to so-called ‘‘centaur’’ models — collaborations between human and machine cognition."

Teacher's Post About Students Using ChatGPT Sparks Debate; Business Insider, September 8, 2024

Jaures Yip, Business Insider; Teacher's Post About Students Using ChatGPT Sparks Debate

"Fritts said that technology addiction has affected students' general agency when interacting with information."

Yuval Noah Harari: What Happens When the Bots Compete for Your Love?; The New York Times, September 4, 2024

Yuval Noah Harari. Mr. Harari is a historian and the author of the forthcoming book “Nexus: A Brief History of Information Networks From the Stone Age to AI,” from which this essay is adapted., The New York Times; Yuval Noah Harari: What Happens When the Bots Compete for Your Love?

"Democracy is a conversation. Its function and survival depend on the available information technology...

Moreover, while not all of us will consciously choose to enter a relationship with an A.I., we might find ourselves conducting online discussions about climate change or abortion rights with entities that we think are humans but are actually bots. When we engage in a political debate with a bot impersonating a human, we lose twice. First, it is pointless for us to waste time in trying to change the opinions of a propaganda bot, which is just not open to persuasion. Second, the more we talk with the bot, the more we disclose about ourselves, making it easier for the bot to hone its arguments and sway our views.

Information technology has always been a double-edged sword. The invention of writing spread knowledge, but it also led to the formation of centralized authoritarian empires. After Gutenberg introduced print to Europe, the first best sellers were inflammatory religious tracts and witch-hunting manuals. As for the telegraph and radio, they made possible the rise not only of modern democracy but also of modern totalitarianism.

Faced with a new generation of bots that can masquerade as humans and mass-produce intimacy, democracies should protect themselves by banning counterfeit humans — for example, social media bots that pretend to be human users. Before the rise of A.I., it was impossible to create fake humans, so nobody bothered to outlaw doing so. Soon the world will be flooded with fake humans.

A.I.s are welcome to join many conversations — in the classroom, the clinic and elsewhere — provided they identify themselves as A.I.s. But if a bot pretends to be human, it should be banned. If tech giants and libertarians complain that such measures violate freedom of speech, they should be reminded that freedom of speech is a human right that should be reserved for humans, not bots."

ChatGPT Spirituality: Connection or Correction?; Geez, Spring 2024 Issue: February 27, 2024

Rob Saler, Geez ; ChatGPT Spirituality: Connection or Correction?

"Earlier this year, I was at an academic conference sitting with friends at a table. This was around the time that OpenAI technology – specifically ChatGPT – was beginning to make waves in the classroom. Everyone was wondering how to adapt to the new technology. Even at that early point, differentiated viewpoints ranged from incorporation (“we can teach students to use it well as part of the curriculum of the future”) to outright resistance (“I am going back to oral exams and blue book written in-class tests”).

During the conversation, a very intelligent friend casually remarked that she recently began using ChatGPT for therapy – not emergency therapeutic intervention, but more like life coaching and as a sounding board for vocational discernment. Because we all respected her sincerity and intellect, several of us (including me) suppressed our immediate shock and listened as she laid out a very compelling case for ChatGPT as a therapy supplement – and perhaps, in the case of those who cannot or choose not to afford sessions with a human therapist, a therapy substitute. ChapGPT is free (assuming one has internet), available 24/7, shapeable to one’s own interests over time, (presumably) confidential, etc…

In my teaching on AI and technology throughout the last semester, I used this example with theology students (some of whom are also receiving licensure as therapists) as a way of pressing them to examine their own assumptions about AI – and then, by extension, their own assumptions about ontology. If the gut-level reaction to ChatGPT therapy is that it is not “real,” then – in Matrix-esque fashion – we are called to ask how we should define “real.” If a person has genuine insights or intense spiritual experiences engaging in vocational discernment with a technology that can instantaneously generate increasingly relevant responses to prompts, then what is the locus of reality that is missing?"

AI SERMON SERIES #1: AI AND THE HUMAN IDENTITY–THE ROYAL PRIESTHOOD; Epiphany Seattle, May 7, 2023

The Rev. Doyt L. Conn, Jr., Epiphany Seattle; AI SERMON SERIES #1: AI AND THE HUMAN IDENTITY–THE ROYAL PRIESTHOOD

Click here to watch the sermon

[Excerpt]

"Character will be the distinguishing trait for what it means to be human. It will be what makes us noble or ignoble, just or unjust, honest or liars. It is our character that will give truth meaning, and us the capacity to look each other in the eye as equal members in the caste of the Royal Priesthood.

The church’s role is as a gathering place and a training ground for Priestly Sovereigns, where we practice being human.  And toward that ends, it is important to recognize the ground upon which we stand. For us, it is within the balanced cadence of our Anglican tradition. We have historical precedence developed over the last 500 years for walking with equanimity on a line that runs through the complexity. It is why we are known as the people of the middle way, or to use a theological term: the via media-which is the theology of balance and moderation and equanimity. Think Queen Elizabeth(God rest her soul).

As Anglicans, we meet the latest headlines with a calm cadence, well aware that this new world of AI will reveal both good news and bad news. And so, when we read an article like the one I read the other day about a University of California San Diego School of Medicine study that found that 75% of the time patients reported that a chat bot’s response was superior in quality and empathy to human doctors…pause, don’t panic.

Remember the via media, that we are people of the middle way. And there will be good news: new medical treatments, and scientific breakthroughs, new efficiencies in manufacturing, and better worldwide food distribution. And there will be troubling news: Job losses, and theft, and fraud, and an Internet polluted with lies. Strikes will be more common, as we see with the Writers’ strike going on in Hollywood right now.

And amidst it all, we walk the middle way, understanding and practicing the true primacy of relationship, relationship with one another, with creation, and with God. + The cross is our sign because of who our God is, a relational God, Trinitarian, Father and Son and Holy Ghost . We are the Royal Priesthood, trained like Jedi as people who walk the earth; well balanced, with equanimity whether the world is run by AI or not."

Leaving Your Legacy Via Death Bots? Ethicist Shares Concerns; Medscape, August 21, 2024

Arthur L. Caplan, PhD, Medscape ; Leaving Your Legacy Via Death Bots? Ethicist Shares Concerns

"On the other hand, there are clearly many ethical issues about creating an artificial version of yourself. One obvious issue is how accurate this AI version of you will be if the death bot can create information that sounds like you, but really isn't what you would have said, despite the effort to glean it from recordings and past information about you. Is it all right if people wander from the truth in trying to interact with someone who's died? 

There are other ways to leave memories behind. You certainly can record messages so that you can control the content. Many people video themselves and so on. There are obviously people who would say that they have a diary or have written information they can leave behind. 

Is there a place in terms of accuracy for a kind of artificial version of ourselves to go on forever? Another interesting issue is who controls that. Can you add to it after your death? Can information be shared about you with third parties who don't sign up for the service? Maybe the police take an interest in how you died. You can imagine many scenarios where questions might come up about wanting to access these data that the artificial agent is providing. 

Some people might say that it's just not the way to grieve.Maybe the best way to grieve is to accept death and not try to interact with a constructed version of yourself once you've passed. That isn't really accepting death. It's a form, perhaps, of denial of death, and maybe that isn't going to be good for the mental health of survivors who really have not come to terms with the fact that someone has passed on."

Startup using blockchain to prevent copyright theft by AI is valued over $2 billion after fresh funding; CNBC, August 21, 2024

Ryan Browne, CNBC; Startup using blockchain to prevent copyright theft by AI is valued over $2 billion after fresh funding

"San-Francisco-based startup Story said Wednesday that it raised $80 million of funding for a blockchain designed to prevent artificial intelligence makers like OpenAI from taking creators’ intellectual property without permission."

Mayoral candidate vows to let VIC, an AI bot, run Wyoming’s capital city; The Washington Post, August 19, 2024

Dan Rosenzweig-Ziff

 and 

Jenna Sampson

 , The Washington Post; Mayoral candidate vows to let VIC, an AI bot, run Wyoming’s capital city

"Miller made this pitch at a county library in Wyoming’s capital on a recent summer Friday, with a few friends and family filling otherwise empty rows of chairs. Before the sparse audience, he vowed to run the city of Cheyenne exclusively with an AI bot he calls “VIC” for “Virtual Integrated Citizen.”

AI experts say the pledge is a first for U.S. campaigns and marks a new front in the rapid emergence of the technology. Its implications have stoked alarm among officials and even tech companies...

The day before, Miller had scrambled to get VIC working after OpenAI,the technology company behind generative-AI tools like ChatGPT, shut down his account, citing policies against using its products for campaigning. Miller quickly made a second ChatGPT bot, allowing him to hold the meet-and-greet almost exactly as planned.

It was just the latest example of Miller’s skirting efforts against his campaign by the company that makes the AI technology and the regulatory authorities that oversee elections...

“While OpenAI may have certain policies against using its model for campaigning, other companies do not, so it makes shutting down the campaign nearly impossible.”"

Artificial Intelligence in the pulpit: a church service written entirely by AI; United Church of Christ, July 16, 2024

Renee DeLuca , United Church of Christ; Artificial Intelligence in the pulpit: a church service written entirely by AI

"Would you attend a church service if you knew that it was written entirely by an Artificial Intelligence (AI) program? What would your thoughts and feelings be about this use of AI?

That’s exactly what the Rev. Dwight Lee Wolter wanted to know — and he let his church members at the Congregational Church of Patchogue on Long Island, New York, know that was what he was intending to do on Sunday, July 14. He planned a service that included a call to worship, invocation, pastoral prayer, scripture reading, sermon, hymns, prelude, postlude and benediction with the use of ChatGPT. ChatGPT is a free AI program developed by OpenAI, an Artificial Intelligence research company and released in 2022.

Taking fear and anger out of exploration

“My purpose is to take the fear and anger out of AI exploration and replace it with curiosity, flexibility and open-mindfulness,” said Wolter. “If, as widely claimed, churches need to adapt to survive, we might not recognize the church in 20 years if we could see it now; then AI will be a part of the church of the future. No matter what we presently think of it, it will be present in the future doing a lot of the thinking for us.”...

Wolter intends to follow up Sunday’s service with a reflection about how it went. On July 21, he will give a sermon about AI, with people offering input about the AI service. “We will discuss their reactions, feelings, thoughts, likes and dislikes, concerns and questions.” Wolter will follow with his synopsis sharing the benefits, criticisms, fears and concerns of AI...

Wolter believes we need to “disarm contempt prior to investigation,” when it comes to things like Artificial Intelligence. “AI is not going anywhere. It’s a tool–and with a shortage of clergy, money and volunteers, we will continue to rely on it.”"

Silicon Valley bishop, two Catholic AI experts weigh in on AI evangelization; Religion News Service, May 6, 2024

leja Hertzler-McCain , Religion News Service; Silicon Valley bishop, two Catholic AI experts weigh in on AI evangelization

"San Jose, California, Bishop Oscar Cantú, who leads the Catholic faithful in Silicon Valley, said that AI doesn’t come up much with parishioners in his diocese...

Pointing to the adage coined by Meta founder Mark Zuckerberg, “move fast and break things,” the bishop said, “with AI, we need to move very cautiously and slowly and try not to break things. The things we would be breaking are human lives and reputations.”...

Noreen Herzfeld, a professor of theology and computer science at St. John’s University and the College of St. Benedict and one of the editors of a book about AI sponsored by the Vatican Dicastery for Culture and Education, said that the AI character was previously “impersonating a priest, which is considered a very serious sin in Catholicism.”...

Accuracy issues, Herzfeld said, is one of many reasons it should not be used for evangelization. “As much as you beta test one of these chatbots, you will never get rid of hallucinations” — moments when the AI makes up its own answers, she said...

Larrey, who has been studying AI for nearly 30 years and is in conversation with Sam Altman, the CEO of OpenAI, is optimistic that the technology will improve. He said Altman is already making progress on the hallucinations, on its challenges to users’ privacy and reducing its energy use — a recent analysis estimated that by 2027, artificial intelligence could suck up as much electricity as the population of Argentina or the Netherlands."

TryTank Research Institute helps create Cathy, a new AI chatbot and Episcopal Church expert; Episcopal News Service, August 7, 2024

 KATHRYN POST, Episcopal News Service; TryTank Research Institute helps create Cathy, a new AI chatbot and Episcopal Church expert

"The latest AI chatbot geared for spiritual seekers is AskCathy, co-launched in June by a research institute and ministry organization and aiming to roll out soon on Episcopal church websites. Cathy draws on the latest version of ChatGPT and is equipped to prioritize Episcopal resources.

“This is not a substitute for a priest,” said the Rev. Tay Moss, director of one of Cathy’s architects, the Innovative Ministry Center, an organization based at the Toronto United Church Council that develops digital resources for communities of faith. “She comes alongside you in your search queries and helps you discover material. But she is not the end-all be-all of authority. She can’t tell you how to believe or what to believe.”

The Rev. Lorenzo Lebrija, the executive director of TryTank Research Institute at Virginia Theological Seminary and Cathy’s other principal developer, said all the institute’s projects attempt to follow the lead of the Holy Spirit, and Cathy is no different. He told Religion News Service the idea for Cathy materialized after brainstorming how to address young people’s spiritual needs. What if a chatbot could meet people asking life’s biggest questions with care, insight and careful research?

The goal is not that they will end up at their nearby Episcopal church on Sunday. The goal is that it will spark in them this knowledge that God is always with us, that God never leaves us,” Lebrija said. “This can be a tool that gives us a glimpse and little direction that we can then follow on our own.”

To do that, though, would require a chatbot designed to avoid the kinds of hallucinations and errors that have plagued other ChatGPT integrations. In May, the Catholic evangelization site Catholic Answers “defrocked” their AI avatar, Father Justin, designating him as a layperson after he reportedly claimed to be an ordained priest capable of taking confession and performing marriages...

The Rev. Peter Levenstrong, an associate rector at an Episcopal church in San Francisco who blogs about AI and the church, told RNS he thinks Cathy could familiarize people with the Episcopal faith.

“We have a PR issue,” Levenstrong said. “Most people don’t realize there is a denomination that is deeply rooted in tradition, and yet open and affirming, and theologically inclusive, and doing its best to strive toward a future without racial injustice, without ecocide, all these huge problems that we as a church take very seriously.”

In his own context, Levenstrong has already used Cathy to brainstorm Harry Potter-themed lessons for children. (She recommended a related book written by an Episcopalian.)

Cathy’s creators know AI is a thorny topic. Their FAQ page anticipates potential critiques."