21–30 of 95 posts
What I don't understand is how is this agent still running? Does the author not read tech news (seems unlikely for someone running openclaw). Or is this some weird publicity stunt? (But then why is nobody walking forward to take credit?)
Indeed, that's a good question. What motivations might someone have to keep this running?
The Ars Technica journalist's account is worth a read. https://bsky.app/profile/benjedwards.com/post/3mewgow6ch22p Benji Edwards was, is, and will continue to be, a good guy. He's just exhibiting a (hopefully) temporary over-reliance on AI tools that aren't up to the task. Any of us who use these tools could make a mistake of this kind.
The Ars Technica journalist's account is worth a read. https://bsky.app/profile/benjedwards.com/post/3mewgow6ch22p Benji Edwards was, is, and will continue to be, a good guy. He's just exhibiting a (hopefully) temporary over-reliance on AI tools that aren't up to the task. Any of us who use these tools could make a mistake of this kind.
For a senior tech writer?
Come on, man.
> Any of us who use these tools could make a mistake of this kind.
No, no not any of us.
And, as Benji will know himself, certainly not if accuracy is paramount.
Journalistic integrity - especially when quoting someone - is too valuable to be rooted in AI tools.
This is a big, big L for Ars and Benji.
The Ars Technica journalist's account is worth a read. https://bsky.app/profile/benjedwards.com/post/3mewgow6ch22p Benji Edwards was, is, and will continue to be, a good guy. He's just exhibiting a (hopefully) temporary over-reliance on AI tools that aren't up to the task. Any of us who use these tools could make a mistake of this kind.
[flagged]
Also, can you please stop posting flamebait and/or unsubstantive comments generally? You've unfortunately been doing this repeatedly, and we end up banning such accounts.
Not an outcome I'm eager to see!
[flagged]
Personal attacks aren't allowed on HN, so please don't. Also, can you please stop posting flamebait and/or unsubstantive comments generally? You've unfortunately been doing this repeatedly, and we end up banning such accounts. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
https://arstechnica.com/staff-directory/
The job of a fact checker is to verify the details, such as names, dates, and quotes, are correct. That might mean calling up the interview subjects to verify their statements.
It comes across as Ars Technica does no fact checking. The fault lies with the managing editor. If they just assume the writer verified the facts, that is not responsible journalism, it's just vibes.
My main takeaway from this episode is that anonymity on the web is getting harder to support. There are some forums that people want to go to to talk to humans , and as AI agents get increasingly good at operating like humans, we're going to see some products turn to identity verification as a fix. Not an outcome I'm eager to see!
The Ars Technica journalist's account is worth a read. https://bsky.app/profile/benjedwards.com/post/3mewgow6ch22p Benji Edwards was, is, and will continue to be, a good guy. He's just exhibiting a (hopefully) temporary over-reliance on AI tools that aren't up to the task. Any of us who use these tools could make a mistake of this kind.
Technically yes, any of us could neglect the core duties of our job and outsource it to a known-flawed operator and hope that nobody notices.
But that doesn't minimize the severity of what was done here. Ensuring accurate and honest reporting is the core of a journalist's job. This author wasn't doing that at all.
This isn't an "any one of us" issue because we don't have a platform on a major news website. When people in positions like this drop the ball on their jobs, it's important to hold them accountable.