this post was submitted on 15 Dec 2023
184 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37747 readers
157 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Stillhart@lemm.ee 24 points 11 months ago (2 children)

I'm confused by the word "but" in that headline. Seem like they are trying to imply cause and effect when the reality is that readers trust outlets less who use AI whether they label them or not.

[–] tuckerm@supermeter.social 19 points 11 months ago

Yeah, this is perfectly consistent with the idea that people don't want to read AI generated news at all.

The title of the paper they are referencing is Or they could just not use it?: The paradox of AI disclosure for audience trust in news. So the source material definitely acknowledges that. And that is a great title, haha.

[–] Umbrias@beehaw.org 4 points 11 months ago

Or it's phrased to illustrate the adverse incentive that will lead to unlabeled ai content.