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

An AI agent published a hit piece on me – more things have happened

theshamblog.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–500 of 670 posts

Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me – more things have happened

#491

Post by dotancohen »

embedding-shape wrote: post #386
dotancohen wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not pointing out a contradiction. I am pointing out that this site - which otherwise seems great - it heavily promoting the popular-online side of a very controversial subject. It looks like they know how to grow an audience at the expense of discourse, because those adherent to the popular-online side will heavily attack all publications that discuss the other side. Recognising this, it is hard to seriously cons…

> - it heavily promoting the popular-online side of a very controversial subject Any specific examples? I took a quick browse but didn't find anything that fit what you're talking about, and what you're saying is a bit vague (maybe because I'm not from the US). Could you link a specific article and then tell us what exactly is wrong?

I'm not from the US either, but I see much vitriol against their current president and his policies. And not a single article in support.

Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me – more things have happened

#492

Post by Groxx »

mpaepper wrote: post #486
gertrunde wrote: post #371

Current response from one of the more senior Ars folk: https://arstechnica.com/civis/threads/journalistic-standards... (Paraphrasing: Story pulled over potentially breaching content policies, investigating, update after the weekend-ish.)

It says 24y in his profile - is that really the more senior at Ars?

An account that's 24 years old? That doesn't raise any warning flags for me, only possibly-positive ones.

Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me – more things have happened

#493

Post by bombcar »

mpaepper wrote: post #486
gertrunde wrote: post #371

Current response from one of the more senior Ars folk: https://arstechnica.com/civis/threads/journalistic-standards... (Paraphrasing: Story pulled over potentially breaching content policies, investigating, update after the weekend-ish.)

It says 24y in his profile - is that really the more senior at Ars?

Yes, unless the original owner is still involved Aurich is likely most senior left.

Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me – more things have happened

#494

Post by bombcar »

mbreese wrote: post #305
the_biot wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't actually publish the comments under the article, only a link. I've long suspected sites doing that are fully aware of how shit the comment section is, and try to hide it from casual viewers while keeping the nutjob gallery happy. Phoronix comes to mind.

This goes back a lot farther with Ars. They done this for years because their comments section is driven by forum software. The main conversations happen in the forums. They are then reformatted for a the comment view. So, their main goal wasn’t to hide the comments, but push people to forums where there is a better format for conversation. At least that’s how it used to work.

The Ars forums used to be incredibly useful sources of information - many of their best authors "grew" from forum posters; and the comments sections on articles were quite informative and had serious comments from actual experts - and discussion!

Then the Soap Box took over the entire site and all that's left is standard Internet garbage.

Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me – more things have happened

#495

Post by zahlman »

rectang wrote: post #133
zahlman wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Kyle Orland is about to be fingered as "one bad apple" that is pretty bad news for Ars.

There are apparently two authors on the byline and it’s not hard to imagine that one may be more culpable than the other. You may be fine with damning one or the other before all the facts are known, zahlman, but not all of us are.

That's why I said "if".

Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me – more things have happened

#496

Post by somenameforme »

mbreese wrote: post #445
mistercheph wrote: post #414

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would you do if you loved space as much as he does? There are no other heroes to cheer for

Or many other sources. If you’re writing about Space, you kinda need to cover SpaceX. If you’re opening critical of everything the owner says, pretty soon you won’t have any sources at SpaceX to give you the insights you need to do your job. I get the impression that the space field is pretty small, so you might not want to burn too many bridges. Also, mission lengths can cover decades. In this case, it might be best…

This is even more true when politics has a rather short time horizon. Musk decided to jump into public politics at a time when the nation is substantially more divided and radicalized than it's been in living memory for most of us, to say nothing of being fueled by a media that's descended into nothing but endless hyper partisan yellow journalism. It's not really a surprise that things didn't work out great. But as the 'affected' move on to new people and new controversies, perspectives will moderate and normalize over time.

And, with any luck, Elon can get back to what he does well and we can get men back on the Moon and then on Mars in the not so distant future.

Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me – more things have happened

#497

Post by bombcar »

dotancohen wrote: post #350
mikkupikku wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Try reading Slashdot these days and it's the same story. I stopped reading regularly when cmdrtaco left but still check in occasionally out of misplaced nostalgia or something.. The comment section is like a time capsule from the 00s, the same ideas and arguments have been echoing back and forth there for years, seemingly losing soul and nuance with each echo. Bizarre, and sad.

I'd like to subscribe to your newsletter, you insensitive clod.

Netcraft reports the newsletter is dead, and covered in hot grits.

Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me – more things have happened

#498

Post by Groxx »

internet2000 wrote: post #419
acdha wrote: post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Philosophically I want to agree with you more but Meta is the informational equivalent of RJ Reynolds. They’ve facilitated crime waves (remember all of the hand-wringing about shoplifting which died down when the government went after Facebook marketplace and Amazon?), supported genocide, and elevated some of the worst voices in the world. Giving them more money and social control is a risk which should be discussed.

You're doing it too. Please don't.

Evil deserves to be called out as evil. Why should we constrain the discussion to anything else about them? The absolute best thing they can do for the world would be to disappear, as soon as possible.

Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me – more things have happened

#499

Post by bombcar »

mortsnort wrote: post #392
g947o wrote: post #281

I am finding less value in reading Ars: * They are often late in reporting a story. This is fine for what Ars is, but that means by the time they publish a story, I have likely read the reporting and analysis elsewhere already, and whatever Ars has to say is stale * There seem to be fewer long stories/deep investigations recently when competitors are doing more (e.g. Verge's brilliant reporting on Supernatural recent…

They also have a strange obsession with stories about vaccines, rare scary ailments, and child porn. I suppose these topics get them good engagement, but not something I want to read about (constantly) on a tech blog.

Considering the fate of one of their most prolific posters/moderators, the third isn't unexpected.

Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me – more things have happened

#500

Post by GaggiX »

lich_king wrote: post #485
GaggiX wrote: post #484

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>These tools are not perfect, but they're right more often than they're wrong. Based on what in particular? The only time I have used them is to have a laugh.

Based on experience, including a good number of experiments I've done with known-LLM output and contemporary, known-human text. Try them for real and be surprised. Some of the good, state-of-the-art tools include originality.ai and Pangram. A lot of people on HN have preconceived notions here based on stories they read about someone being unfairly accused of plagiarism or people deliberately triggering failure modes…

I had fun with AI detectors in particular for images, even the best one (Hive in my opinion) was failing miserably with my tests, maybe the one trained on text are better but I find it hard to trust them, in particular if someone know how to fiddle with them.
Post reply on HN