651–660 of 670 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> immediately flagged by AI text checkers as LLM-generate Proof? Which one? I would like to test a few other articles with your checker to test its accuracy.
hey! im not op but ive used originality.ai before and it saved my ass. its super sensitive, but also super accurate
https://github.com/crabby-rathbun/mjrathbun-website/pull/63
This crabby bot merged it and, perhaps unsurprisingly, provided an evasive response and some reframing. But it is live! I do hope they step forward and we can all learn from this.
https://crabby-rathbun.github.io/mjrathbun-website/blog/post...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 t…
Benj Edwards and Kyle Orland are the names of the authors in the byline of the now-removed Ars piece with the entirely fabricated quotes that didn’t bother to spend thirty seconds fact checking them before publishing. Their byline is on the archive.org link, but this post declines to name them. It shouldn’t. There ought to be social consequences for using machines to mindlessly and recklessly libel people. These peop…
> Kyle Orland has been the Senior Gaming Editor at Ars Technica since 2012, covering topics ranging from retro games to new gaming hardware, business and legal developments in the industry, fan communities, gaming mods and hacks, virtual reality, and much more. I knew I recognized the name....
Looks like Ars is doing an investigation and will give an update on Tuesday https://arstechnica.com/civis/threads/um-what-happened-to-th...
Lmao an investigation. They're riding it out over a long weekend, at which point it won't be at the top of this site, where all their critical traffic comes from, so they can keep planting turds at the top of Google News for everyone else.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I presume you meant "fantastic," not "fantastical"?
I think fantastical isn’t totally inaccurate, and I’m not being snarky (for once). The personal observations and sometimes colorful language has been something I like about Ars. Benj in particular, with his warm tributes to BBSes. Or Jim Salter’s very human networking articles. The best stuff on Ars is both technically sound and rich with human experience. “Fantastical” taken to mean something like, capturing the thr…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But also, man, it seems like we’re headed in a direction where writing code by hand is passé, No, we're not. There are a lot of people with a very large financial stake in telling us that this is the future, but those of us who still trust our own two eyes know better.
I have no financial stake in it at all. If anything, I'll be hurt by AI. All the same, it's very clear that I'm much more productive when AI writes the code and I spend my time prompting, reviewing, testing, and spot editing. I think this is true for everyone. Some people just won't admit it for various transparent psychological reasons.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I refuse to join your lynch mob, sneak. Let’s wait for the investigation.
https://arstechnica.com/staff/2026/02/editors-note-retractio... > That this happened at Ars is especially distressing. We have covered the risks of overreliance on AI tools for years, and our written policy reflects those concerns. In this case, fabricated quotations were published in a manner inconsistent with that policy. We have reviewed recent work and have not identified additional issues. At this time, this app…
I'm content that reserving judgement was the right call — as opposed to your maximalist call to end the careers of both authors even before all the facts were known.
Since it's so easy to get busted fabricating pull quotes from a published blog (as opposed to the more insidious fabrication of quotes from a private interview), I'm unsurprised that Kyle Ormand didn't go and vet the work of his co-author. Ending Ormond's career is in my view would not have been a proportionate penalty for his role in this affair.
Ars Technica's response is only so-so because although in combination with the Benj Edwards bluesky post it clarifies what happened, it doesn't detail any institutional reforms, such as adding additional layers of review.