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

Pakistani newspaper mistakenly prints AI prompt with the article

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 180 posts

Re: Pakistani newspaper mistakenly prints AI prompt with the article

#61

Post by jerf »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #51
robofanatic wrote: post #29

Soon whole world will be fluent in impeccable American English, but only on paper.

Pretty easy to condition a prompt with regional idioms and spellyngs.

As much as the default LLMisms are annoying me, it's also a honeymoon period right now where you can even suspect whether something is AI generated based on the default LLM-isms. Word about how to fix their tone has been getting around in academia for a while amongst students trying to pass detection filters, once they're out into the world we can expect to have even more AI generated content masked behind individualized, unique style prompts that aren't immediately recognizable as the default LLM voice.

Re: Pakistani newspaper mistakenly prints AI prompt with the article

#62

Post by strix_varius »

dredmorbius wrote: post #56
nicbou wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The violation of AI policy is regretted. That's a good example of when you shouldn't use passive voice.

This is a convention for journalistic corrections, e.g., "The Times regrets the error", used to note corrections for at least a century: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/13/insider/the-times-regrets... >

Your example is not passive voice.

Re: Pakistani newspaper mistakenly prints AI prompt with the article

#63

Post by abdullahkhalids »

chrismorgan wrote: post #5

The current title (“Pakistani newspaper mistakenly prints AI prompt with the article”) isn’t correct, it wasn’t the prompt that was printed, but trailing chatbot fluff: > If you want, I can also create an even snappier “front-page style” version with punchy one-line stats and a bold, infographic-ready layout—perfect for maximum reader impact. Do you want me to do that next? The article in question is titled “Auto sal…

The newspaper in question is Pakistan's English language "newspaper of record", which has wide readership.

For some reason, they rarely ever add any graphs or tables to financial articles, which I have never understood. Their readership is all college educated. One time I read an Op-Ed, where the author wrote something like: If you go to this gov webpage, and take the data and put it on excel, and plot this thing vs that thing, you will see X trend.

Why would they not just take the excel graph, clean it up and put it in their article?

Re: Pakistani newspaper mistakenly prints AI prompt with the article

#64

Post by RobotToaster »

dredmorbius wrote: post #43
michaelbuckbee wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For years, both the financial and sports news sides of things have generated increasingly templated "articles", this just feels like the latest iteration.

This dates back to at least the late 1990s for financial reports. A friend demoed such a system to me at that time. Much statistically-based news (finance, business reports, weather, sport, disasters, astronomical events) are heavily formulaic and can at least in large part or initial report be automated, which speeds information dissemination. Of course, it's also possible to distribute raw data tables, charts, or m…

Obviously the solution is to use AI to extract the raw data from their AI generated fluff.

It's like the opposite of compression.

Re: Pakistani newspaper mistakenly prints AI prompt with the article

#66

Post by IAmBroom »

abdullahkhalids wrote: post #63
chrismorgan wrote: post #5

The current title (“Pakistani newspaper mistakenly prints AI prompt with the article”) isn’t correct, it wasn’t the prompt that was printed, but trailing chatbot fluff: > If you want, I can also create an even snappier “front-page style” version with punchy one-line stats and a bold, infographic-ready layout—perfect for maximum reader impact. Do you want me to do that next? The article in question is titled “Auto sal…

The newspaper in question is Pakistan's English language "newspaper of record", which has wide readership. For some reason, they rarely ever add any graphs or tables to financial articles, which I have never understood. Their readership is all college educated. One time I read an Op-Ed, where the author wrote something like: If you go to this gov webpage, and take the data and put it on excel, and plot this thing vs…

Because it was BS opinion, dressed in scientifical sounding clothing?

Re: Pakistani newspaper mistakenly prints AI prompt with the article

#67

Post by IAmBroom »

bschne wrote: post #10

The same thing happened to German magazine Spiegel recently, see the correction remark at the end of this article https://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/unternehmen/deutsche-bahn-...

"We regret to admit that our editors don't actually take the time to read these articles before hitting the PUBLISH button..."

Re: Pakistani newspaper mistakenly prints AI prompt with the article

#68

Post by IAmBroom »

tonyhart7 wrote: post #25
bonesss wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As programmers I think we can extend some professional empathy and understanding: copy-and-pasting all day is a lot harder than you’d think.

compared to the writing yourself???? absolutely not

It was sarcastic.

Re: Pakistani newspaper mistakenly prints AI prompt with the article

#69

Post by IAmBroom »

strix_varius wrote: post #62
dredmorbius wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a convention for journalistic corrections, e.g., "The Times regrets the error", used to note corrections for at least a century: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/13/insider/the-times-regrets... >

Your example is not passive voice.

Yes, they are pointing out how it should have been written.

Re: Pakistani newspaper mistakenly prints AI prompt with the article

#70

Post by IAmBroom »

serial_dev wrote: post #17
benterix wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OTOH kudos to them for regretting AI slop (even if they don't want to point out who precisely is regretting). I know some who'd vehemently deny in spite of evidence.

They don't regret serving you AI slop, they regret that the "writer" didn't even read their own article and that they got caught because of it.

"We regrets that mistakes were noticed."
Post reply on HN