3 ms·
It probably wasn't AI at all. That magazine has just about 25,000 subscribers, so you can guess the quality of their journalism. Out of their authors most likel
by jansan 4y ago
It probably wasn't AI at all. That magazine has just about 25,000 subscribers, so you can guess the quality of their journalism. Out of their authors most likelike just made it up and put the "AI" label on it to make it "more exciting".
- matteason 4y agoThe BBC News report (https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/65333115 https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/65333115) says that it was character.ai. They don't say how they know that though (presumably it's disclosed in the magazine itself?)
- schroeding 4y ago> presumably it's disclosed in the magazine itself? Yes, indirectly, they have screenshots of the answers with a blue "c.ai" box in them.
- mseepgood 4y agoWouldn't an AI generated interview be cheaper than paying an author to make one up?
- jansan 4y agoGood argument, didn't think of that. And there may not even be a journalist working anymore at that magazine.
- JohnFen 4y ago> That magazine has just about 25,000 subscribers, so you can guess the quality of their journalism. Not saying anything about this particular magazine, but in general, I don't think that you can judge the quality of a publication's journalism by their subscriber count.