The more I think about it, the more I hate @[email protected]'s implication here that allowing machine-generated plagiarism and fabrications in media+opinion is somehow "inevitable" Frankly, it seems to go against the entire existence of media watch? www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/e...
Ep 08 - Crikey wipe-y - Media Watch

Online publisher Crikey wipes articles that fail its own AI rules.

Media Watch
Yeah, sure, the height and speed of the tsunami of bullshit have both grown by an order of magnitude. Not great!!! But that means we should double down on aggressively, effortfully attacking anything that worsens that further. That means **OPPOSING** a software system that by design will always lie

Wikipedia Bans AI-Generated Co...
Wikipedia Bans AI-Generated Content

“In recent months, more and more administrative reports centered on LLM-related issues, and editors were being overwhelmed.”

404 Media
Since when was disallowing a system that operates on both plagiarism and fabrication a "hardline" position to hold when your ENTIRE PROFESSION sells itself as being against those 2 things??? That a huge proportion of journalists are relying on a lie machine suggests WE'RE NOT HARDLINE ENOUGH?!
How many journalists, for instance, are using Grammarly: a piece of software that ACTIVELY DEMANDS YOU INSERT FABRICATED QUOTES INTO YOUR ARTICLES I really really do not think there is any awareness of how their entire industry is voluntarily being turned to sand, from the inside out

RE: https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:66lbtw2porscqpmair6mir37/post/3mhxnn4xe5k2w
A huge part of the problem here is the "responsible use" narrative. The arrogant, 40-something white man in a professional setting thinks he has a Fortress-Brain full of Man Logic but he does not and he is being sycophantically groomed by the most effective fabrication machine ever invented

RE: https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:tbqqvyv6pjjww44glrmycaxl/post/3mhtpitkftc2w
Chatbots are **DESIGNED** from the ground up not to be correct but to **INSTIL CONFIDENCE IN LIES**. No one is immune, but the more arrogant, uncritical and unaware you are, the more susceptible you are to being gassed up by a text program, the worse it is

Fintan O'Toole: Once one of th...
Fintan O'Toole: Peter Vandermeersch ignored his own golden rule about using AI

A journalist using AI-generated quotes in articles about AI is like a doctor injecting one virus in the hope of curing another

The Irish Times
Every excuse used here is really just post-hoc justification because someone took the absolutely filthy deal of convenience at the cost of accuracy and honesty "I just use it for ideas", "I get references but check them", "I use it to edit the text" etc: it decays your work so badly for everything
The fact that so many people who are churning out slop have to frantically row it back and pretend they just used it 'for guidance' or whatever shows that there is still active, material opposition to fakery out there, and consequences for doing it. futurism.com/artificial-i...
I do not get the impression there is a widespread understanding of how existential this is for mainstream journalism. But whatever, this is their choice. Please sign up for and support media that disallows plagiarism and fabrication in their reporting: bsky.app/profile/alex...

RE: https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:mencpxk4spd3xn3qotwkyyqf/post/3ma7eul6yuk24
Conversely: any media outlets that allows any reliance on a generative text system in any part of their process is basically just announcing they're opening up their journalism pipeline to a software system that convincingly fabricates information, and you should treat them accordingly.