Live data from Hacker News

B&H Photo Published an AI-Generated Guide Written by a Fake Person

petapixel.com

31–40 of 51 posts

Re: B&H Photo Published an AI-Generated Guide Written by a Fake Person

#31
post #12

Who cares? This is both my initial reaction and, on reflection, something I’m genuinely curious about. If one can’t tell the difference without deep investigation, the consumer likely doesn’t care (I don’t). Hopefully / presumably it would still go through whatever editorial controls are in place. So who does care? If this is rooted in fears of our jobs being taken, the train has left the station and we need to deal…

Maybe that works for pure entertainment. I buy a lot of books, including a lot of nonfiction. I care quite a bit about the author. There's a lot of garbage out there with just flat wrong information. One of the few things you have to go on is an author's reputation. Which, if you're making that up, becomes a garbage signal, and something approaching fraud. So for now at least, any outfit that publishes something that…

GenAi is a tool like any other. If an author has been able to build earn my trust, I’d trust them to use the genai tool responsibly as well. This includes being ultimately responsible for the veracity of any claims made. If the facts end up being wrong, they’d lose my trust regardless of whether genai is in the loop or not. This abstracts to a publisher or company level as well.

For now, gen ai has enough issues that a human should probably be in the loop, either as a collaborating author or editor. At some point, that will probably change and that is okay with me.

You also make a good point about why buy books. Perhaps at some point gen ai will be good enough to generate high quality, true, and personalized info such that we won’t have to!

The fraud issue is interesting. I personally disclose when I use genai. But I wouldn’t be offended if someone else didn’t. Again, if I trust someone, I trust them to use the tool responsible. If I don’t, I’d take what they say with a grain of salt anyway.

Re: B&H Photo Published an AI-Generated Guide Written by a Fake Person

#32
post #23
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As soon as I get the feeling that an article was written by a LLM, I stop reading. Usually it's repetitive phrasing, or grade school essay style summaries that turn me off. In short, a poor ratio of text to actual information. Even bad writing can have useful information in it, and I will plow through it. But vapid text that meanders without saying anything isn't worth anyone's time. On the other hand, if LLM-generat…

I was always under the impression that the grade school style summaries started before LLMs. Search engines recommends that kind of writing as condition to get into the answer box. It is bad writing never the less.

The LLMs had to be trained on something.

Re: B&H Photo Published an AI-Generated Guide Written by a Fake Person

#33
post #17

Who cares? This is both my initial reaction and, on reflection, something I’m genuinely curious about. If one can’t tell the difference without deep investigation, the consumer likely doesn’t care (I don’t). Hopefully / presumably it would still go through whatever editorial controls are in place. So who does care? If this is rooted in fears of our jobs being taken, the train has left the station and we need to deal…

As soon as I get the feeling that an article was written by a LLM, I stop reading. Usually it's repetitive phrasing, or grade school essay style summaries that turn me off. In short, a poor ratio of text to actual information. Even bad writing can have useful information in it, and I will plow through it. But vapid text that meanders without saying anything isn't worth anyone's time. On the other hand, if LLM-generat…

I basically agree with wolpoli and I think you as well. If the content ends up good, who cares.

Right now, it takes work and human collaboration to get quality content out of an llm. In the future it probably won’t.

Re: B&H Photo Published an AI-Generated Guide Written by a Fake Person

#34

Who cares? This is both my initial reaction and, on reflection, something I’m genuinely curious about. If one can’t tell the difference without deep investigation, the consumer likely doesn’t care (I don’t). Hopefully / presumably it would still go through whatever editorial controls are in place. So who does care? If this is rooted in fears of our jobs being taken, the train has left the station and we need to deal…

> Who cares? This is both my initial reaction and, on reflection, something I’m genuinely curious about. If one can’t tell the difference without deep investigation, the consumer likely doesn’t care (I don’t). "I was reading something to learn about some topic I don't know about, and it might've all been a bunch of bullshit, but since I didn't know it was bullshit, who cares!" What the . . . .

If I’m learning about a new topic, I do assume it might be bullshit and have a variety of sources to help give me confidence on truthiness. The llm really has nothing to do with this! I don’t know if I’d trust a random blog, or a legit looking website, or gpt4 more but I’d read them all and make my own judgement.

Re: B&H Photo Published an AI-Generated Guide Written by a Fake Person

#36

My rule of 100: for every scam or ruse that's discovered, there are 99 others like it that fly under the radar. Applied to medicine, my field: for every error that's discovered and made public, 99 others just like it go unremarked. For every air industry near miss, 99 others are never reported.

The only foolproof method to detect AI-generated material is to examine the initials of the author. The author of this article is Alexandra Ibarra.

Re: B&H Photo Published an AI-Generated Guide Written by a Fake Person

#38

> When reached for comment, a B&H representative claimed the company’s policy was not to use AI-generated content and that it would “investigate this matter with our content teams.” Shortly thereafter, the article and profile were deleted. But for a month, the story remained online and positioned itself as an expert guide written by a real person and visitors to the blog would have been none the wiser. Seems like a s…

> and chose to fabricate it instead

In large companies usually there are even simpler mundane explanations. Most likely in this case there was no previous company policy, and some local department was running an experiment.

Then it got discovered, policy was established, and article was deleted. Nothing really malicious, nothing really interesting.

Re: B&H Photo Published an AI-Generated Guide Written by a Fake Person

#39

> When reached for comment, a B&H representative claimed the company’s policy was not to use AI-generated content and that it would “investigate this matter with our content teams.” Shortly thereafter, the article and profile were deleted. But for a month, the story remained online and positioned itself as an expert guide written by a real person and visitors to the blog would have been none the wiser. Seems like a s…

> their sales tax hijinks are legendary

Courts ruled in their favor. Don't blame B&H, blame the tax code

Re: B&H Photo Published an AI-Generated Guide Written by a Fake Person

#40

>Multiple companies have toyed with the idea of using AI to generate stories, all of whom have been widely panned for the decision. G/O Media (which operates Gizmodo and Kotaku) attempted it earlier this year, the result of which was error-riddled pieces and widespread pushback from its staff. The company plans to move forward with AI authors despite this. Gannett, which operates USA Today, also attempted it but pull…

> whatever ideals journalism may have aspired to in the past no longer exist (if they ever even existed in the past) This is when I like to remind people that if you do a good enough job at journalism, you get an award named after a pioneer of sensationalistic “yellow journalism” who propagandized to start the Spanish-American War: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Pulitzer

> like to remind people

Is this phrase used figuratively, or are there actual times when you've exercised this preference upon someone?

I think if you said that to me, in a tone which implied you were enjoying saying it, I'd probably ask you why it's relevant. For example, can you demonstrate that Pulitzer Prizes are generally awarded to "yellow journalists"? Or can you show how the recipients of the prize are in any way awarded for behaviour which you're saying Pulitzer the person exhibited. Because it just sounds like a quirk of history, rather than revealing any important facts about journalism or how prizes are awarded

Post reply on HN