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

AI fake news complaining about how AI fake news is the death of real news

niemanlab.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 70 posts

Re: AI fake news complaining about how AI fake news is the death of real news

#51

Post by throw-the-towel »

Frieren wrote: post #22
spaceman_2020 wrote: post #17

I constantly wonder what is the societal benefits of AI It’s really hard to build a coherent pro-AI argument

AI is great at producing low value content. That low value content replaces the high value but high cost one. That is horrifying and destroys jobs, removes expertise from the world, and makes our lives worse. I do not see how AI could be a net positive either.

Wait, there's a law that says exactly that about money! Bad money always drives out good money (because the good money gets hoarded). AI as fake money, a funny coincidence.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gresham%27s_law

Re: AI fake news complaining about how AI fake news is the death of real news

#55

Post by vitally3643 »

irishcoffee wrote: post #48
nearlyepic wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No, no that doesn't work. Nobody thinks that. Yeah, obviously. It was a sarcastic reply to a nonsense argument of “there are no bad things only bad people”

I didn't say that either. Strawmanning isn't very nice. Have a good day!

It must be exhausting moving those goalposts so often

Re: AI fake news complaining about how AI fake news is the death of real news

#56

Post by vitally3643 »

irishcoffee wrote: post #27
spaceman_2020 wrote: post #17

I constantly wonder what is the societal benefits of AI It’s really hard to build a coherent pro-AI argument

AI is like when some fella named Nobel synthesized dynamite. He sure did have good intentions as it relates to safety for workers doing dangerous jobs. There is your “pro” argument. The “con” argument would be all the other ways dynamite has been twisted and used since. This AI stuff is neither good or bad, it is a tool. The people using it are either good or bad.

AI is like nuclear weapons research. It killed a horrific number of people in unimaginably gruesome ways, and it rendered parts of the environment utterly uninhabitable for generations but we got mumble mumble fission power out of it so it's impossible to say if nuking live humans was a bad thing.

A nuclear bomb is just a tool, the people who use them are good or bad.

Sometimes tools in and of themselves are bad. They exist exclusively to do bad things and cause only damage, and on scales that are literally impossible for regular people to imagine. The consequences of using the tool are only bad, and last decades if not centuries.

There are no "peaceful" uses for nuclear bombs. We tried, and every proposal failed because they're nuclear goddamn bombs and the literal fallout ruins the environment for generations in fun and unpredictable ways.

A screwdriver or a hammer are tools that are morally ambivalent. The People Grinder 9000 is not, nor is the Copyright Launderer 2000.5 or the IP Theft Machine. Tools designed explicitly to do bad things are in and of themselves bad

Re: AI fake news complaining about how AI fake news is the death of real news

#59

Post by joenot443 »

yousif_123123 wrote: post #10
joenot443 wrote: post #6

This is a great read. It would appear https://theeditorial.news is "Under Construction" now. The articles themselves [1] were originally super creepy when you know the entire thing is made up. > Michelle Quaid is fifty-two years old, the mother of two grown children, and she began working at the Commercial-News in 1999 > Quaid wore a polo shirt with the paper's logo — a stylized 'C' — over her heart. She's not real!…

The article from archive you link.. scores as mostly human on GPTZero (I tested a random paragraph). That's the issue I've always seen with AI detectors, they might be able to detect direct LLM output, but if you give an article to an AI and tell it write something made up using that format and make it appear like a real story, the detectors will think its real.

Yeah that's the weird thing with GPTZero... It claims "99% accuracy" when, IIUC, that actually means "99% of the time we won't incorrectly flag a human written post as AI."

It's an extremely easy fence to jump over, as demonstrated by the article.

Re: AI fake news complaining about how AI fake news is the death of real news

#60

Post by joenot443 »

b112 wrote: post #13
joenot443 wrote: post #6

This is a great read. It would appear https://theeditorial.news is "Under Construction" now. The articles themselves [1] were originally super creepy when you know the entire thing is made up. > Michelle Quaid is fifty-two years old, the mother of two grown children, and she began working at the Commercial-News in 1999 > Quaid wore a polo shirt with the paper's logo — a stylized 'C' — over her heart. She's not real!…

[flagged]

> Why have 20 or 30 stories tailored to specific groups of humans, when you can have stories rendered on the fly for individuals, targetting all their greatest fears and folly.

I think it's easy to overestimate how much the average voter is seeking out these weird articles. Obviously as nerds on HN they're enjoyable to pick apart, but in the grand scheme of the American electorate, I'd wager this sort of AI fake news makes a pretty negligible difference.

> I can imagine someone's loved one dying of cancer a month before the election, and both sides using targetted stuff claiming that the other guy actually caused the cancer somehow.

I think that's a bit of a stretch.

> I really liked some scifi book I read, where the person appointed to be president for 4 years, was determined to hate the very idea of having the job. Didn't want it. Yet was also very driven.

That sounds interesting, what's it called?

Post reply on HN