I personally don't mind if they use AI to augment human writing/introduce interesting personas instead of the formulaic intro-bulleted list-conclusion articles from ChatGPT
Sports Illustrated Published Articles by Fake, AI-Generated Writers
51–60 of 89 posts
Re: Sports Illustrated Published Articles by Fake, AI-Generated Writers
#52I wonder how many journalists are already using AI without us (or their employer) realizing it.
just fine tune on your own writing
Re: Sports Illustrated Published Articles by Fake, AI-Generated Writers
#53For years, ESPN has put machine generated predictions of upcoming games. https://www.espn.com/nba/preview/_/gameId/401584885 "The Associated Press created this story using technology provided by Data Skrive and data from Sportradar." Example paragraph: "The two teams match up for the second time this season. The Nuggets defeated the Clippers 111-108 in their last meeting on Nov. 15. Jokic led the Nuggets with 32 poin…
I've these summary articles for sports and stocks.The article quality is so low that it's mostly useless information. Who even reads these articles? Does anyone get benefits?
The reason is people will click on them thinking it is an interesting story. The publisher (ESPN/Yahoo/etc.) just care that you click on the page so the ads load and they get the impressions. Some PM probably ran some analysis that machine generated articles from a stats table will get X number of clicks which will generate Y dollars in ad revenue. There was likely no consideration that the overall content of the site would decrease. After awhile people stop clicking on them because they know it will be a machine generated article so eventually the publisher will stop putting them on their website.
I think the industry term for this is "made for advertising content".
Re: Sports Illustrated Published Articles by Fake, AI-Generated Writers
#54Tangentially related: " Microsoft Publishes Garbled AI Article [0] Calling Tragically Deceased NBA Player 'Useless' " [1] [0] https://web.archive.org/web/20230913163653/https://www.msn.c... [1] https://futurism.com/msn-ai-brandon-hunter-useless
FWIW, I don't think that one was even using any kind of modern AI. The bizarre phrasing is characteristic of the article having been run through a "spinner" tool which randomly substitutes words or phrases for synonyms, without any regard to context -- which is how it ended up saying he "handed away" (passed away) after having played as an "ahead" (forward). These tools have existed since the late 2000s, but were mostly used by SEO spammers.
Re: Sports Illustrated Published Articles by Fake, AI-Generated Writers
#55> After we reached out with questions to the magazine's publisher, The Arena Group, all the AI-generated authors disappeared from Sports Illustrated's site without explanation. Our questions received no response.
Probably better to just admit to it to avoid the usual Streisand effect.
Re: Sports Illustrated Published Articles by Fake, AI-Generated Writers
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
The unsettling thing about it is that it's a lie from front to back, intended to deceive people into believing there are real people sharing recipes, when the people don't exist and nobody has ever eaten the food.
I now want to make a food blog where it's all AI generated, but using exclusively awful recipes.
That's a great idea. But instead of using AI to generate it, you should write it yourself while trying to sound like you're an AI.
Then get into arguments in the comments about how you really are a machine.
Re: Sports Illustrated Published Articles by Fake, AI-Generated Writers
#57I know some folks who are doing this in the food blogging space, see https://tastytango.blog/ It's hard to pin down exactly what I find so unsettling about the practice – it's almost like the uncanny valley, but for written content that apes human expression instead of imagery?
I can relate. Might not be exactly this, but it makes me feel similar to why people hate advertising. Which I believe is, people don't like feeling lied-to, and everyone knows that marketers are trying to get in your head to manipulate you into manufacturing desire or stoking insecurity, all for the purposes of getting you to buy their products. I think people like organic word-of-mouth, but on the flipside, hate whe…
This type of behavior will only serve to cheapen content across the board. At this point, even the word "content" betrays the emptiness of it all - people don't pay for bags and boxes of "content" do they?
AI "content" is a nothing-burger. It is inherently devoid of "value" and seems like a last-ditch effort to squeegee the remaining drops of attention off of everyone's eyeballs without actually investing in genuine creativity.
As more and more of this dross floods the Internet, the very purpose of the web may be called into question. How can we share information with each other if the world's library/archive becomes the world's bot-poop landfill?
The Internet has evolved from a shared information system to so much more, so I hope this unfortunate phase will soon pass and ML tech can be put to more appropriate use than just crapping out low-effort "content" all over the place.
Re: Sports Illustrated Published Articles by Fake, AI-Generated Writers
#58How deep does the rot go in all of this?
Has it started happening at newspapers of record yet?
Re: Sports Illustrated Published Articles by Fake, AI-Generated Writers
#59The doomsday clock for the fun parts of the internet is reaching midnight. This is what generative AI will be unleashing in droves as the software becomes more mature and eliminates the giveaway sentences and phrasing.
This seems to depend heavily on what you consider 'fun'. I agree that AI is taking over these spaces and that it's alarming, but OTOH a lot of the examples in this thread (sports chatter, recipes etc) are mostly crap, because they are dominated by microcelebrities whose persona is intense obsession with one topic (and which persona is often just the brand of a sophisticated marketing operation).
Re: Sports Illustrated Published Articles by Fake, AI-Generated Writers
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's different in one way in particular: AI-generated content is in the public domain in the US, since copyright isn't applicable until a human's creative input occurs. That's either better or worse, depending on your viewpoint!
That's not really how it works. That'd be like saying all oil paintings are in the public domain because paintbrushes can't hold copyright. The copyright goes to the person triggering the generation of the content similar to how if you use blur tool in photoshop you don't suddenly lose copyright.
Maybe that will be the case in future after a court decides so, but at present AI content does not get copyright protection.
https://www.klgates.com/Federal-Court-Rules-Work-Generated-b...