|
Top-level
@edk @joe I've encountered a number of situations already where AI generated content is being credited with some fake name. For example, some news sites at the very beginning of this stupid craze basically invented a byline for their AI content. I sadly forget which ones because this came in a flurry of such slop reports. But the point is, I don't think this will solve the issue. Should still do it anyway, of course. Like, who doesn't already do this and why? 5 comments
@joe I think part of the reason it was so quickly identified is because all they did was come up with a fake name and put no other effort to make it seem like a real person. At any rate, I'd happily take the L on this prediction of efficacy if it meant more people properly credited works as they really should be doing anyway, so, everyone inspired by this feel free to prove me wrong đ @hipsterelectron @edk @joe May have been. The one I was able to remember was CNET though they used a group name not a person's name https://futurism.com/the-byte/cnet-publishing-articles-by-ai and also they've owned up to it and followed up on it etc., wasn't quite as sleazy in practice as some of the other examples. Still sufficiently deceptive to influence this thought exercise, imo. |
Gregory's Server
@ztj interesting point. it does seem like a lot more work overall though to make up a name and actually back it up with evidence of a real person behind it like social media accounts etc. so just seeing a byline might not be evidence in its own, but does provide more material to verify the source