3 ms·
Not sure if I'm being an old fart here or not, but what the hell happened to writing? The title of this post makes reference to an existing ethics board at Goo
by secstate 13y ago
Not sure if I'm being an old fart here or not, but what the hell happened to writing?
The title of this post makes reference to an existing ethics board at Google, and then the third paragraph, without mentioning anything about an ethics board besides the title, references the ethics board the DeepMind would like to create at Google without any other contexts.
I think I'm done with Forbes. What a piece of trash article.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- jacquesm 13y agoIt reads as though the authors are trying to get hired.
- darkrabbi 13y agoThe problem stems from "Forbes Contributor" system "It’s a simple deal: there is a flat monthly fee, a bonus for hitting certain unique visitor targets, and a fee per unique user after bonus targets are achieved. For paid contributors, the arrangement requires a certain number of posts per month and a specified level of audience engagement through our commenting system." With a setup like that, of course it's ideal to push sensationalist articles that will stir up controversy/comments even if it's fabricated. We saw a ton of this in eSports with a particular Forbes contributor milking the communities "OMG WE'RE ON FORBES" attitude for 30+ articles. They're not the only major outlet using a similar content farming system, and I can't really blame anyone for their moves in this situation. Sensationalist Misinformation > Meaningful Editorial Content online and it's been that way for a long time.
- yuhong 13y agoHow about getting rid of the bonuses and just mandate a certain number of posts per month, with support for reporting posts filled with garbage for example?