Library of Talossa

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

I've been reviewing the Library of Talossa for a legislative idea and it led to a question. @GV you might have an answer to this one. What is the policy for inclusion of materials in the Library? Is it any item produced by a Talossan is eligible for inclusion? If that is the case, then perhaps we might have some kind of drive to compile additional items as I think we have several authors, including the King, whose works I do not see in the Library.

I have a book of poems I'd like to include if it is for works created by Talossans.

[Leonardo Miguel Carvalho Marques]

As a citizen, your question about the Talossa Library and the inclusion of works by Talossans is, in my opinion, extremely important and very pertinent. It's a topic that touches directly on the preservation of our country's culture and identity.

The idea that 'any item produced by a Talossan is eligible for inclusion' is fantastic and fundamental. A library is not just a repository of books; it is a mirror of a nation's soul, a living archive of its creations, thoughts and aspirations. By opening the door to all the works created by our citizens, we are valuing and recognising individual talent, contributing to a richer and more diverse cultural panorama.

Your observation that 'we have several authors, including the King, whose works I don't see in the Library' is a crucial point. This suggests that there is untapped potential to significantly enrich the Library's collection. An initiative to compile and encourage the submission of more materials would be a laudable endeavour. It would be a way of strengthening our collective memory and cultural heritage.

And of course, your own book of poems is a perfect example of the kind of valuable contribution that can and should be included. It's through gestures like yours that the Library will grow and become an even more complete and representative resource.

In short, the issue you have raised is vital to the cultural vitality of Talossa. It is something that, as a citizen, I strongly encourage and view with great enthusiasm.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

There is no policy, beyond what GV and I have thought was notable.  Generally speaking, I prefer only to add things that we have hosted on the wiki, but GV has also added things that he has in his personal possession.  I didn't want to cause conflict by just deleting all of them, but personally I don't see much use in that... no one can read those things, so they're not part of the library, really.

If you'd like to add things, please look at the manner in which existing items are hosted and copy it, with the appropriate templates and linking.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

As a citizen,

Are you a citizen, Leo?  I thought you weren't yet a citizen.  Is ChatGPT a citizen?

[Leonardo Miguel Carvalho Marques]

Are you a citizen, Leo?  I thought you weren't yet a citizen.  Is ChatGPT a citizen?

Baron Alexandreu Davinescu
I'm not a citizen yet. I'm in the future or potential state. It was a mere oversight on my part in several situations to put "citizen" instead of "future citizen".

Answering your second question, no, but who told you that my opinion was fabricated by ChatGpt.
As far as I can remember, freedom of expression still exists within certain limits in this nation.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

We have pretty wide freedom of expression, and there's no law against using an LLM to generate your responses.  However, they usually make mistakes (like just now).  And while they might have very long responses that look impressive, they're not really you.

We'd love to talk with you directly, instead, even if your English isn't perfect. :)

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

If you'd like to add things, please look at the manner in which existing items are hosted and copy it, with the appropriate templates and linking.

Will do, I'd love it if we did gather more works from Talossans. I am hoping to work with someone for a translation of Andy Weir's The Egg story on Fora Talossa. And the Library of Talossa led me to that.

[Leonardo Miguel Carvalho Marques]

We have pretty wide freedom of expression, and there's no law against using an LLM to generate your responses.  However, they usually make mistakes (like just now).  And while they might have very long responses that look impressive, they're not really you.

We'd love to talk with you directly, instead, even if your English isn't perfect. :)

Ok! I'm not going to feed this subject any more. Given that I am being conditioned in my opinions or responses to certain issues.
Even if it doesn't look like it directly, I understood the rhetoric that the Baron wanted to use or say

[Marcel Eðo Pairescu Tafial, UrGP]

Ok! I'm not going to feed this subject any more. Given that I am being conditioned in my opinions or responses to certain issues.
Even if it doesn't look like it directly, I understood the rhetoric that the Baron wanted to use or say

What are you talking about?

[GV]

AD is right.  There has never been a full policy regarding inclusion in the Library of Talossa save what AD & I thought was "notable".

- GV, Royal Archivist

[Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC]

What are you talking about?

Any immigration procedure that doesn't *exclude* the use of ChatGPT (not necessarily before application, but definitely before citizenship) is going to lead to things like this.

I mean, there's a difference with a citizen or a prospective using Google Translate; it might sound a bit "fake" but there's a real person behind it.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

I guess I don't 100% understand what that could look like.  Isn't the remedy exactly what happened: a citizen telling them that we'd rather hear from them personally, and then (if they keep it up) no two people petitioning for them?

I always assumed that the time they spend with us before a petition was meaningful: get to know them a little as a person, understand some of what their behaviors are and how they speak, and then either admit them into our community or decline to do so.

[Marcel Eðo Pairescu Tafial, UrGP]

I guess I don't 100% understand what that could look like.  Isn't the remedy exactly what happened: a citizen telling them that we'd rather hear from them personally, and then (if they keep it up) no two people petitioning for them?

I always assumed that the time they spend with us before a petition was meaningful: get to know them a little as a person, understand some of what their behaviors are and how they speak, and then either admit them into our community or decline to do so.

I mean, if we dont filter GPT users beforehand, that means they can spam Witt for two weeks and worsen the experience for everyone else. There's gotta be a better way than this.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

I mean, if we dont filter GPT users beforehand, that means they can spam Witt for two weeks and worsen the experience for everyone else. There's gotta be a better way than this.

But this has barely been a problem... one guy has posted several posts.

I think there's certainly things we can and should do, but I just don't know that we need any laws.  I mean, the Government could pretty easily give an explicit warning not to use AI.  I'd be happy to write it.  We need a toes-to-toupee review of the immigration process already to try to deal with the current crisis, and our onboarding of prospective immigrants should be included.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

It could look like this, as part of the standard introduction on Witt:

BE ADVISED: You should not use any LLM or AI to help you communicate.  We want to hear from you, not a computer.

If you use ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Grok, DeepSeek, or another AI to write your posts, you will probably not be admitted to the Kingdom of Talossa.

I just think our first instinct to an approaching problem shouldn't be a law, but... like, let's just try telling people.