Sometimes, the AI gets the little details wrong.
In school we always get an assignment to compare the same story in different newspapers. It was amazing to see them all have different details. And that was before the internet existed. So AI here isn’t better, just cheaper.
Other times, the AI wholly fabricates events.
We call that Boris Johnson.
We call that Boris Johnson.
We call that politicians haha.
I mean, the AI is worse. It’s literally impossible to not be worse, it would need a 100% accuracy to the sample data while also never hallucinating, that’s pretty much completely impossible.
Take an article from a reputable publisher, an article for a subject that you are expert in.
Read it and make note of facts they got right and got wrong.
Now apply that same ratio to articles where you have little or no expertise.
These guys are just speed running th at to its inevitable end.
“When news breaks, we fix it”
Where is Craig Kilborn when you need him?
You’re thinking of NewsFix.
The app? Or the news company/network.
“NewsBreak”, a free app with roots in China that is the most downloaded news app in the United States.
Never heard of it. Hard to believe it’s the most downloaded news app. I guess I’m out of touch.
50M+ downloads on Google Play. Hard to verify if farmed tho.
“Most downloaded” just means “biggest phone farm”.
I was expecting it to be Ground News considering how much they advertize on YouTube.
Do most Americans really get their news from Chinese AI now? I can’t really believe that but then sadly maybe I can…
Yes
Speaking of details wrong:
most downloaded local news app
- 50,000,000+ downloads
Meanwhile Google News (which does local):
- 1,000,000,000+ downloads
Eh, for a while google news was a bake-in app. I’m okay excluding those figures.
Yeah, but “2nd place” (if it’s even that) is so far down that many of us including me haven’t even heard of it before.
I usually respect ars technical for writing great stories. This time, however, they could’ve included the name of the app so it wasn’t clickbaity. It’s newsbreak for those wondering.
Uh… The very first sentence mmmmm
After the most downloaded local news app in the US, NewsBreak, shared an AI-generated story about a fake New Jersey shooting last Christmas Eve, New Jersey police had to post a statement online to reassure troubled citizens that the story was “entirely false,” Reuters reported.
Right, but the headline doesn’t include that to bait you into clicking the article to get that information. Just like every other click bait article about android app issues.
I usually respect ars technical for writing great stories. This time, however, they could’ve included the name of the app so it wasn’t clickbaity
so now youre changing your requirements after your first statement is shown to be flawed? The headline rarely conveys what you are suggesting.
so now youre changing your requirements after your first statement is shown to be flawed?
L. O. L.
First of all, my story can’t change, since that’s my first comment in this thread. Second, reading comprehension is your friend in situations like this. From what you quoted:
I usually respect ars technical for writing great stories.
This time, however, they could’ve included the name of the app so it wasn’t clickbaity
Those are two independent clauses, referring to content and headline separately. That would be clear if you consider the definition of click bait:
Clickbait typically refers to the practice of writing sensationalized or misleading headlines in order to attract clicks on a piece of content. It often relies on exaggerating claims or leaving out key information in order to encourage traffic.
Their wording a bit confusing if you’re not reading closely, but their original point still stands. The content is generally good, but the headline is clickbaity.
The headline rarely conveys what you are suggesting.
Just because click bait is common doesn’t mean it isn’t click bait.
Pathetic. Just admit your made a stupid statement and accept it.
Lol, ok kid. I’m not going to argue with you all day because you misinterpreted someone else’s confusingly worded statement.
I don’t have time to deal with that kind of fragile ego.
They aren’t the original poster. you’re just yelling at some passerby who was simply trying to tell you that you misinterpreted the original comment…
Future historians will have a lot of trouble identifying fake ai news when studying our current era.
