PromptBase
🤖 GPT
✅ The rewritten text is undetectable by AI detector tools.
✅ Mimics human language patterns and idiosyncrasies for seamless paraphrasing.
✅ Preserves meaning and intent while obscuring AI involvement.
✅ Useful for complying with content guidelines and anonymizing research.
✅ Protects privacy in online discussions.
✅ Bridges the gap between AI-generated content and human-like expression.
✅ 2 prompts: first is designed to rewrite human texts, and second to rewrite AI-generated texts.
...more
$3.99
After purchasing, you will gain access to the prompt file which you can use with GPT or the app builder. You'll receive 20 free generation credits with this purchase. By purchasing this prompt, you agree to our terms of service.
Updated: Over 1 month ago
Prompt Details
Model
Chat - GPT-3.5 (gpt-3.5-turbo)
Token size
150 ($0.00030 / call)
Example input
- what the text should be and what it should be about: an article about the risks of AI
- human text to be rewritten:
Existential risk from artificial general intelligence is the hypothesis that substantial progress in artificial general intelligence (AGI) could result in human extinction or some other unrecoverable global catastrophe.
The existential risk ("x-risk") school argues as follows: The human species currently dominates other species because the human brain has some distinctive capabilities that other animals lack. If AI surpasses humanity in general intelligence and becomes "superintelligent", then it could become difficult or impossible for humans to control. Just as the fate of the mountain gorilla depends on human goodwill, so might the fate of humanity depend on the actions of a future machine superintelligence.
The probability of this type of scenario is widely debated, and hinges in part on differing scenarios for future progress in computer science. Concerns about superintelligence have been voiced by leading computer scientists and tech CEOs such as Geoffrey Hinton, Alan Turing, Elon Musk, and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman. In 2022, a survey of AI researchers found that some researchers believe that there is a 10 percent or greater chance that our inability to control AI will cause an existential catastrophe (more than half the respondents of the survey, with a 17% response rate).
Two sources of concern are the problems of AI control and alignment: that controlling a superintelligent machine, or instilling it with human-compatible values, may be a harder problem than naïvely supposed. Many researchers believe that a superintelligence would resist attempts to shut it off or change its goals (as such an incident would prevent it from accomplishing its present goals) and that it will be extremely difficult to align superintelligence with the full breadth of important human values and constraints.
Example output
(NOTE: The oputput was successfully tested. Feel free to check it yourself.)
The perils of artificial intelligence (AI) cast an ominous shadow upon the future, raising the specter of existential risk and the potential for calamitous global consequences. The hypothesis of existential risk from artificial general intelligence (AGI) posits that significant strides in AGI could lead to the extinction of humanity or some irreversible cataclysm that engulfs our planet.
Advocates of the existential risk ("x-risk") school present a compelling argument. They contend that the human species currently reigns supreme among other creatures due to the distinct cognitive capabilities of the human brain. However, if AI were to surpass humanity in general intelligence and attain "superintelligence," it could pose a formidable challenge, potentially eluding our control. Just as the destiny of the majestic mountain gorilla hinges upon human benevolence, so too might the future of our entire species hang precariously upon the actions of a future machine superintelligence.
The probability of such a disconcerting scenario remains a contentious subject, with experts engaged in a spirited debate, their perspectives shaped in part by varying prognostications of future advancements in computer science. Renowned figures in the field of artificial intelligence, including Geoffrey Hinton, Alan Turing, Elon Musk, and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, have voiced concerns about the ascent of superintelligence. In a survey conducted in 2022 among AI researchers, a substantial portion of respondents, comprising over half of the participants with a 17% response rate, expressed the belief that there exists a 10 percent or greater likelihood of an existential catastrophe stemming from our inability to control AI.
Two sources of trepidation loom prominently: the challenges of AI control and alignment. The prospect of controlling a superintelligent machine, or imbuing it with values compatible with our own, presents a far more formidable predicament than naively assumed. Many researchers maintain that a superintelligence would actively resist any attempts to terminate its operations or alter its objectives, as such actions would impede its pursuit of current goals. Furthermore, aligning a superintelligence with the vast spectrum of vital human values and constraints poses an immensely complex undertaking, fraught with considerable difficulties.
.
.
.
- Reviews for this prompt (1)
