On 2026-02-15 7:05 am, Jori Lehtinen wrote: > Steffen, > > I will try to properly go trough the legal texts you presented, and try to demonstrate my solution more from your perspective. > > I pasted our arguments in to AI and asked for a neutral analysis, that I think is worth reading. > > ----------------------------------- > > Here’s a neutral, text-grounded review *taking Jori’s proposal at face value*: This is an interesting, and to my reading, useful contribution. But based on reasoning and a link that I have posted to the parallel thread "Concern about AI-generated contributions in VCWG discussions", I would like to suggest that it will be useful, both short and long-term, to know: a) What specific AI model and version you used, and whether this is an untouched result, or did you edit it afterwards? b) What prompt did you give it? If it was a complex prompt, can you supply a summary of what occurred -- was it a back-and-forth, or merely a direct text input? Did you supply files or direct where it should look? Etc. There's more in the other thread, but it seems to me, at this unusual point in time, these threads can't be viewed as separate; we need new norms for what's happening now, which is overlapping what used to be separate domains. Because at the moment I no longer know what is 'a person', so keeping the streams of their discussions separated may not even be conceptually possible. 🙂 Steven Rowat
Received on Sunday, 15 February 2026 19:21:27 UTC