If this is ML-targeted, frankly it’d be a great test case for making the judicial system decide whether content generated largely or wholly by a machine learning system shall even be considered as “speech” in the traditional sense, since it’s the system doing the “speaking”, not a human, and the Bill of Rights does not offer any protection to non-humans.
If this is ML-targeted, frankly it’d be a great test case for making the judicial system decide whether content generated largely or wholly by a machine learning system shall even be considered as “speech” in the traditional sense, since it’s the system doing the “speaking”, not a human, and the Bill of Rights does not offer any protection to non-humans.
That would hurt the bottom line of the investors, so I doubt the Supreme Board Room goes that way.