Live data from Hacker News

Ars Technica fires reporter after AI controversy involving fabricated quotes

futurism.com

151–160 of 409 posts

Re: Ars Technica fires reporter after AI controversy involving fabricated quotes

#151

I guess Blameless Postmortems haven't arrived in journalism yet. Pretty weird that journalism as a business still revolves around "we hired a guy to write a thing, and he's perfect. oh wait, he's not perfect? it was all his fault. we've hired a new perfect guy, so everything's good now." My dudes... there are many ways you can vet information before publishing it. I get that the business is all about "being first", b…

They have. Some paper journals even have a dedicated space in early pages (2-3) for corrections and retractation.

Re: Ars Technica fires reporter after AI controversy involving fabricated quotes

#152
post #149
post #50

Journalists and bloggers usually write about others’ mess ups and apologies, dissecting which apologies are authentic and which apologies are non-apologies. In this incident, Aurich Lawson of Ars Technica deleted the original article (which had LLM hallucinated quotes) instead of updating it with the error. He then published a vague non-apology, just like large companies and politicians usually do. And now we learn t…

"I inadvertently ended up with a paraphrased version of Shambaugh’s words rather than his actual words,” Edwards continued. He emphasized that the “text of the article was human-written by us, and this incident was isolated and is not representative of Ars‘ editorial standards." ---------- A reporter whose bailiwick is AI should have known that he needed to check any quotes an LLM spat out. The editorial staff should…

Editorial staff?

There was such a thing, in newspapers up until 2000. Then, as profits nosedived, these sorts of things largely disappeared.

Purely online entities have no way to pay for real editorial staff.

News has no money, compared to news of old. It's part of the reason 99% of modern news is just reporting other people's tweets or whatever.

I can't imagine many news companies having much money for court battles (to force disclosure of documents, or force declassification, or fighting to protect sources). Or spending months or years investigating a story.

Our news sources are poor, weak now.

Re: Ars Technica fires reporter after AI controversy involving fabricated quotes

#154
post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know people love to hate on the AI overviews, and I'm a person who generally hates both google and AI. But--I see them as basically good and ideal. After all most of the time I am googling something like trivial, like a simple fact. And for the last decade when I have to click into sites for the information it's some SEO spam-ridden garbage site. So I am very glad to not have to interact with those anymore. Of cour…

> I am also convinced that the people here reporting that the overviews are always wrong are... basically lying? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Availability_heuristic No one remembers when AI Overview gets the answer right (it's expected to do so after all) but everyone has their favorite examples of "oh stupid AI."

That's incomplete, because another "nobody remembers" is when the hallucination differs from reality, but the reader doesn't promptly detect the problem and remember where they got it from.

Think about the urban legends in the style of "the average person eats X spiders per year." It's extremely unlikely that Rumor Patient Zero is in a position to realize it's wrong, or that they will inform the next person that it came from an LLM summary.

Re: Ars Technica fires reporter after AI controversy involving fabricated quotes

#155
post #55

As much as I respect the site and gladly financially support it, this is ultimately a failure on Ars Technica and its editors. If there are any. If this were just some random blogger, then yes the blame is totally theirs. But this was published under the Ars Technica masthead and there should have been someone or something double checking the veracity of the contents. That said, there are a number of Ars Technica con…

Eric Berger has a strong pro-Musk bias (having literally written a fawning book about him). To him, Musk can do no wrong, it seems.

I also dislike Dan Goodin’s reporting. He tries to talk the talk, but nearly every article he writes has some tell that he doesn’t really understand the thing he’s reporting on. Which is fine if he was relying on third-party expertise and quoting that, but he tries to make it sound like he has the expertise and it just comes up short. I feel like he’s a good example of that old fallacy that you think the news is correct about everything, until they report about something you know.

For me, Ashley Belanger is the best reporter they have. She might not have the subject matter expertise some of the others there claim, but she has the best journalism of anybody there. Lots of direct sources, well written, and the right level of depth. I honestly feel like I’m reading a different (and better) publication when I read her articles. More than once, I’ve had to scroll up to see if the article I’m reading was one of Ars’ licensed outside pieces, as the quality bar was higher than I’m used to, only to find her name.

Beth Mole is a close second. She has subject matter expertise, good journalism, and loves to slip in some humor or justified “get a load of this idiot” comments.

Re: Ars Technica fires reporter after AI controversy involving fabricated quotes

#156

I guess Blameless Postmortems haven't arrived in journalism yet. Pretty weird that journalism as a business still revolves around "we hired a guy to write a thing, and he's perfect. oh wait, he's not perfect? it was all his fault. we've hired a new perfect guy, so everything's good now." My dudes... there are many ways you can vet information before publishing it. I get that the business is all about "being first", b…

This isn’t a case of “made a mistake”/“did something incorrectly”, though. This is “knowingly broke the rules”. They had a policy against using our benevolent robot overlords to generate slop.

And fabricating quotes is pretty high up there in the list of things that journos should never, ever do.

Re: Ars Technica fires reporter after AI controversy involving fabricated quotes

#157

I guess Blameless Postmortems haven't arrived in journalism yet. Pretty weird that journalism as a business still revolves around "we hired a guy to write a thing, and he's perfect. oh wait, he's not perfect? it was all his fault. we've hired a new perfect guy, so everything's good now." My dudes... there are many ways you can vet information before publishing it. I get that the business is all about "being first", b…

> I guess Blameless Postmortems haven't arrived in journalism yet.

Not anymore. Back in the day of print newspapers, a dozen people read an article before it was printed, including editorial staff, fact checkers, legal review, layouting and printers. If something slipped through – which was much rarer at the time – they'd also print a retraction.

Most of that stopped when newspapers and the blogosphere basically merged into one ad-funded business.

Re: Ars Technica fires reporter after AI controversy involving fabricated quotes

#158
post #26

I have a story with Benji. Last year I went viral, and Benji was the first person to interview me. It was a really cool experience, we chatted via Twitter dms, and he wrote a piece about my work - overall did a decent job. Then, 6 months later a separate project I was adjacent to was starting to pick up steam. I reached out to him asking if he wanted to cover us. No response. Then, tech crunch wrote an article on our…

> Then, 6 months later a separate project I was adjacent to was starting to pick up steam. I reached out to him asking if he wanted to cover us. No response. [...]

> I reached to Benji again saying "Hey would you like to chat again, now we have some coverage?" And he finally responded, but said he couldn't report on me because he had a directive that he could only report on things that didn't have any prior or pre-existing coverage (?)

> I thought that was rather strange, especially since we already had built up a relationship.

The US mentality might be different, but at least having grown up and living in Germany, such an annoying hustler who wants to use some journalist as a marketing influencer for his private project is a huge no-no. In other words: it is a very reasonable decision (perhaps even the only right one) for any journalist to fob off such a hustler.

Re: Ars Technica fires reporter after AI controversy involving fabricated quotes

#159
post #55

As much as I respect the site and gladly financially support it, this is ultimately a failure on Ars Technica and its editors. If there are any. If this were just some random blogger, then yes the blame is totally theirs. But this was published under the Ars Technica masthead and there should have been someone or something double checking the veracity of the contents. That said, there are a number of Ars Technica con…

> That said, there are a number of Ars Technica contributors that are among the best in their fields I miss Maggie Koerth & Jon Stokes

Yes, dearly missed. As is John Siracusa’s Mac OS reviews.

Re: Ars Technica fires reporter after AI controversy involving fabricated quotes

#160
post #50

Journalists and bloggers usually write about others’ mess ups and apologies, dissecting which apologies are authentic and which apologies are non-apologies. In this incident, Aurich Lawson of Ars Technica deleted the original article (which had LLM hallucinated quotes) instead of updating it with the error. He then published a vague non-apology, just like large companies and politicians usually do. And now we learn t…

I'm sad to see them fire him. I've seen far worse: I have always approached issues by asking for accountability and improvement. Frankly, he already did: he openly apologised. I was very happy with that, it demonstrated integrity and I remained respecting him.

Even worse,

> I have been sick in bed with a high fever and unable to reliably address it (still am sick) [0]

In an earlier HN thread, I saw someone ask why Ars was requiring staff work while ill. If that's true, if he posted without verification while sick and under pressure, which is implied and plausible, firing looks doubly bad.

Ars has lost a lot of my trust in recent years, with articles seeming far worse. Just like you, I'm sorry to see the editorial position here.

[0] https://bsky.app/profile/virtuistic.bsky.social/post/3mey2mq...

Post reply on HN