Rated: Human AI Detectors, Slop Buttons, and the New Price of Reputation

So thank you for joining me. I'm Nola Simon. I'm the host of the Ho- the Hope and Possibilities podcast. I wanted to talk about something that somebody I used to work with wrote.

I'm not gonna identify her because it's not really helpful, but essentially this c-clip is basically… I'm gonna read it. "With advancements in video technology and AI, we have the ability to capture not just information, but the conversation, explanation, stories, and context that make expertise so valuable. Even more importantly, we can make that knowledge discoverable when somebody needs it, instead of relying on knowing exactly who to ask. The wisdom of the people who came before us no longer has to disappear when they do.

How do we make sure the knowledge today's experts have spent decades building is still helping someone for 20 years ago?" So I have an issue with this Your conversations, your stories, your explanation, that's all of your history, your personality, your experiences, your expertise. It's not just knowledge that's work-related, it's your perspective and your point of view And so for one, what consent do you have to give for a company to have access to that long after you leave?

And not only that who is held accountable if that information is actually used in such a way that Doesn't work out. So if your information is something that you have on file and you leave the company and five years later they come across something that you said or did, but the context has completely changed, and you have no control or influence over how the company uses it, and then it backfires and blows up, are they gonna try to hold you accountable? So I wouldn't think that employment law would allow it, but the way that everything has been changing these days, the questions are really rife here.

It's for one, do they have your consent to use this past when you leave? Now, there are organizations… The organization I used to work with, it was financial services. All of our recordings, all of our emails, anything we wrote, we knew that was going to be subject to audit, and it was gonna be kept on record for I think it was six or seven years at this point. I can't remember exactly.

But again, this is, are auditors gonna come in? Are they looking for documentation? Did somebody tell ch- tell you to change an amount of a withdrawal, and is that documented? Can they find that, that email or that call?

But how do you discover that information, right? How do we… What did she say here? "The wisdom of the people who came before us no longer has to disappear when they do." And we can make that knowledge discoverable when somebody needs it instead of relying on knowing exactly who to ask.

So that's the type of system that needs a whole infrastructure. So not only are they gonna have access to everything that you've done in the past, they're actually going to be building out ways to make that discoverable. So that means it's going to be indexed, it's going to be searched, it's going to be pattern matched, it's going to be interpreted in such a way, and are names gonna be attached? So if they're publishing something using you as a source, are they gonna cite you?

And if this is a company that you no longer want to be associated with, are there questions in terms of how that information is being used with integrity when that might not be a relationship that you want to maintain And you're not comfortable with how that's going to impact your reputation your digital footprint and not only that, compensation. So if you were so valuable that the information that you gave a company, your conversations, your stories, the context, all those explanations are so valuable three to five years or even 20 years later, which would be rare because things do change, how are you compensated?

What is the value of access to that knowledge, and why do the companies get to own that without compensating the staff? If you continue to be an employee, you would continue to get paid, and that's the deal. But now it's almost like the employment contract that, that agreement between employee and employer has changed because it's not just the information you give to somebody while you're employed and being compensated through payroll. It's the value of what you performed and what you did while you were there long after when you leave and once that payroll stops.

Does that not deserve to be compensated? So this question stopped me. And again, the person who wrote this, she's a good person. She's I respected her.

I liked working with her. I'm flabbergasted by the perspective that the company owns all of this without any sort of negotiation. That floors me. And what do we have to do to renegotiate that so that This is made explicit.

Is it legislation? Is it individual negotiation? Is it structural? Whose information is deemed to be important?

Is there ageism at play? Is there racism? Is there misogyny? Who's misinterpreting because of bias?

I just - It floors me. It really floors me. And so yes, this topic is technically about AI, but it's also about trust, reputation, and consent, and the value of what it is to be an employee. And it's not just employees, it's anybody would have a contract with that employee - with that employer who gets recorded.

So then it becomes contract employees freelancers consultants, anybody who's being recorded and captured by AI through video, through writing, through all of the different ways that you could be monitored by AI now. And that's not the deal. That's not in the contracts. This is something that we have to look at.

And to me, I think it very much is relevant to the future of careers, the future of professional relationships between companies and organizations, and how we value each other as coworkers, as collaborators It, it's a really big question. Anyways, thank you for listening. I hope, I'd love to hear your thoughts if you have any insights or opinions or stories.