Even outside the tech world, TatGPT is the subject of heated debate, as talent search platform Plum turns to it to outline how employees will or won’t use generative artificial chatbots. Last summer, ChatGPT produced a draft document for the Kitchener, Ontario-based company, which is about 70 percent closer to the company’s final policy.
Plum CEO Caitlin McGregor recalled that there was nothing wrong. There was nothing crazy. But there was an opportunity to be a little more specific or a little more relevant to our business.
Plum’s four-page final policy, based on ChatGPT’s draft, recommends keeping employees’ customer and proprietor information out of AI systems. Along with this, the technology has suggested checking the correctness of something given.
Plum is one of the few Canadian institutions that have clearly codified their position on AI. Because people are now relying more and more on technology to increase productivity at work.
Many have received policy incentives from the federal government. As a result, the federal government has released an AI policy for the public sector. Now numerous startups and large corporations are working on them for themselves or creating their own versions.
The companies say it is not their intention to reduce the use of generative AI. Their aim is to ensure that the Commission is more empowered to use it.
Niraj Bhargava, founder of Ottawa-based AI management software firm NuEnergy.AI, says you’d be wrong not to harness the power of this technology. It has brought huge opportunities in productivity and efficiency. On the other hand, if you use it without protection, there is a big risk. It is a threat to the survival of our planet. But there are also practical risks such as bias and transparency or individual privacy issues. Striking a balance between these two is very important. However, the same policy does not apply to all organizations. A hospital may have a different answer than your private technology company as to what is acceptable.
