3 ms·

The main reason to be disappointed is the fluency with which people have taken to just outright lying. The article, to me, proves pretty conclusively that the a

The main reason to be disappointed is the fluency with which people have taken to just outright lying. The article, to me, proves pretty conclusively that the articles were AI generated and that most (or at least some) of the authors aren't real people but the spokesman is just... lying. > A Gannett spokesperson took issue with the Guild claim that the writers weren’t real people, pointing to the LinkedIn page of one AdVon Commerce writer whose name appeared on a Reviewed article. At the top of his account, that writer touted his experience in “polishing AI generative text.” Like... This is like pointing to a robot and saying it isn't a robot. Nobody is fooled. But... why even do it? Isn't it... idk, embarrassing? To just talk complete nonsense?

jstarfish 3y ago
> The main reason to be disappointed is the fluency with which people have taken to just outright lying. The article, to me, proves pretty conclusively that the articles were AI generated and that most (or at least some) of the authors aren't real people but the spokesman is just... lying. Agreed. Maybe there's a proper term for it but I call it the "hitman fallacy," where people reason that they can't be accused of murder because they aren't the party that pulled the trigger. In a way, I can see their [tortured] logic-- they did in fact pay real money to a real person to write that article. It should follow that a real person did in fact write it, otherwise it's fraud. Gannett shies away from calling it that because it's not fraud when the other party delivers what you asked for.