526
Now that's journalism (lemmy.world)
submitted 9 months ago by to c/fuck_ai@lemmy.world
27 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Crossposted from https://lemmy.world/post/39998197

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 166 points 9 months ago (17 children)

I hate this so much. It also shows that the "Author" did not even read what the AI put out. You are potentially reading pure and uncontrolled AI hallucinations.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 17 child comments
    •
  • [–] 117 points 9 months ago (7 children)

    Nor an editor

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [+] 74 points 9 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (5 children)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    to be fair, I sympathoze with the editor. even though I know that their job is different than my job, and their job is literally to catch stuff like this. I mean I think it is I don't know.

    part of my job is reviewing my team members' work. there's only so many times that you can review the same task before you just assume that they did what you told them and you ship it. I have one team member where I need to review their shit at least three times in order for it to be correct. all of the information for it to be correct is usually there on the first review. they simply do not do some of the things noted, or introduce new errors as they work. It's not my job to micromanage them or babysit them or correct their mistakes endlessly, at some point they are responsible for their own work, and I am not responsible for every mistake they make.

    I know it's not the same situation — but it is relatable and it makes me empathize with the editor

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    I'm reminded of two coworkers. One I could just ask to do something and he would do a generally reasonable job of it. The other would make weird choices and introduce problems. Reviewing the latter's work was sometimes worse than just doing it myself from the start.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago

    yep. the latter person.. I've dealt with a few now. it's exhausting. at some point you have to just accept that you are not entirely responsible for their work product, and they just suck.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago

    If I was an editor I'd leave it in too. I can take the embarrassment of admitting I didn't proof read every article in order to embarrass some asshat using LLMs to generate slop news.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 13 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

    And now you’re also aware that you could have gotten some snappy graphics but didn’t.

    Edit: aware, not away.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 9 months ago* (4 children)

    It reminds me of crypto. “Etherium would work perfectly if people just stopped acting so… human! And used it right!”

    Chatbots are the same. They’re selling a fantasy that’s just not how human beings behave.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago (3 children)

    I hate that humans really do the dumbest shit and sometimes it benefits other bad humans because the ignorant ones don't realize they're getting fucked.

    Crypto is a perfect example. It's being traded and treated like a security but it is literally backed by thin air. Bitcoin is a huge bubble propped up by speculators and sooner or later it will come tumbling down.

    I do wish I was brave or stupid enough to buy into crypto because it can pay out but only because the people who are all in on it don't actually know how it works. It's definitely mostly just rug pulls and scams in crypto land.

    The idea of a decentralized global currency is not bad per se but all the current implementations of crypto are bad and not being used like currency at all.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

    Agreed that Crypto, NFTs, and I would even say LLMs very broadly speaking, are not evil technologies (LLMs are incredibly unfortunate -- this is perhaps the worst time in history for them to become available) per se. All of these have limited applicability. But obviously any new platform or tech has to disrupt entire industries or else it's a total flop, so we get these idiotic bubbles.

    Bitcoin is a huge bubble propped up by speculators and sooner or later it will come tumbling down.

    My take (OK actually this take) is it's because all the "legitimate" grinds are funnelling value up to 10 different billionaires, leaving less and less to go around. The only thing left is scam economics -- fooling desperate people to ""invest"" in the latest grift, on the gamble that they can get their measly capital in on the new bubble before the suckers and bag holders come sniffing around. But of course the 0.01% own the whole gameboard, so good lucky screwing over your fellow investors, and oh yeah, every single working person.

    I think that's why the AI platforms are being pushed so forcefully -- like, there is nothing organic or deliberate about them. Just like Crypto & NFTs. There's no other way to make oodles of money anymore.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •