Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ars Technica fires reporter after AI controversy involving fabricated quotes

futurism.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 409 posts

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

#161

Post by vintagedave »

beloch wrote: post #149
AnonC wrote: 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…

Yes: in newsrooms, this is the editor's responsibility. I note the editor wasn't fired.

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

#162

Post by kolinko »

ModernMech wrote: post #89

I'm very bad with names and quotes, so sometimes I'll ask ChatGPT something like "what's that famous quote Brian Kernighan said about programming language names" and it will just make shit up, when really I was thinking about Donald Knuth. But according to ChatGPT, Kernighan famously said: “Everyone knows that Perl is designed to make easy things easy, and hard things possible, but nobody knows why it’s called Perl.”…

Which version? I just tested mine and it replied with an actual quote

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

#163

Post by vintagedave »

14 wrote: post #101
AnonC wrote: 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…

Where I work in healthcare honestly and owning up is encouraged and unless there is major negligence not often punished. They just want to try learn why the mistake happened and look for ways to prevent it going forward. My buddy said for his company if an accident happens WorkSafe is not out to punish as long as they are very forward and honest. Again they want to learn how to avoid it happening again. Punishment on…

I agree. I'd add that the fact he appeared to be working while sick -- and that he pre-emptively and immediately publicly apologised -- means I think he already did behave as he should.

This makes me question Ars not him. Loss of credibility indeed.

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

#167

Post by infotainment »

DamnableNook wrote: post #155
breput wrote: 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…

I'd say if one has any interest in writing objectively about space technology, one will likely end up being perceived as having a "pro-Musk bias".

Elon himself is indeed questionable, but you really can't argue with his space-related achievements. Even other eccentric billionaires like Bezos haven't come close.

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

#168

Post by true_religion »

Barbing wrote: post #126
autoexec wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It was against their policy to use AI in producing any part of the final article, and the writer was aware of that. More than that, as a reporter on AI he should have been fully aware that AI frequently bullshits and lies. He should have known it was not reliable and that its output needs to be carefully verified by a human if you care at all about the accuracy or quality of what it gives you. His excuse that this…

>his whole job Possibly akin to a roofer taking a shortcut up there, then taking a spill? You knew better but unfortunately let the fact that you could probably get away with it with zero impact decide for you. IIRC hallucinations were essentially kicked off initially by user error, or rather… let’s say at least: a journalist using the best available technologies should have been able to reduce the chance of this big…

Alternatively… there was no AI error, the reporter made up the quotes, and lied when they were challenged.

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

#169

Post by gwd »

rahimnathwani wrote: post #34

The headline says Ars fired the reporter, but AFAICT the article doesn't include any facts that indicate this. All we know is that he no longer works there, and that Ars refused to provide any additional information.

> the article doesn't include any facts that indicate this.

It does include two facts:

1. That the reporter's bio on the webpage changed "...is a reporter at Ars" to "...was a reporter at Ars". On the one hand, that's pretty thin sauce. On the other hand, that's not exactly the sort of change that gets made randomly.

2. They reached out to the various people involved, and although nobody has confirmed it, it's also the case that nobody has denied it.

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

#170

Post by netsharc »

gdulli wrote: post #66
skygazer wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it “plagiarism” to misattribute hallucinated quotes? Not that a whole lot of sloppy, unprofessional shortcuts weren’t taken, but plagiarism doesn’t seem like the right word, as quotes are almost definitionally not plagiarism. But maybe these were paraphrasings masquerading as quotes, so maybe that’s the difference.

"Slop" and "hallucinate" have meanings outside of AI too, but it's easier to repurpose existing words than come up with a whole new lexicon for AI failure modes.

Groan, redefining "plagiarism" to add "inventing quotes" is a stupidity too far for me.

Making up quotes and attributing them to people has happened before AI, journalists proper and pretend have done it too.

Post reply on HN