Just a sample of the Echomail archive
Cooperative anarchy at its finest, still active today. Darkrealms is the Zone 1 Hub.
|    CONSPRCY    |    How big is your tinfoil hat?    |    2,445 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 1,867 of 2,445    |
|    Mike Powell to All    |
|    AI routinely misrepresent    |
|    24 Oct 25 09:46:33    |
      TZUTC: -0500       MSGID: 1624.consprcy@1:2320/105 2d60cda1       PID: Synchronet 3.21a-Linux master/123f2d28a Jul 12 2025 GCC 12.2.0       TID: SBBSecho 3.28-Linux master/123f2d28a Jul 12 2025 GCC 12.2.0       BBSID: CAPCITY2       CHRS: ASCII 1       FORMAT: flowed       Think you can trust ChatGPT and Gemini to give you the news? Here's why you       might want to think again              Date:       Thu, 23 Oct 2025 16:39:57 +0000              Description:       AI assistants routinely misrepresent news, raising concerns about       misinformation and public trust in the digital age.              FULL STORY              When you ask an AI assistant about news and current events you might expect a       detached, authoritative answer. But according to a sweeping international       study led by the BBC and coordinated by the European Broadcasting Union        (EBU), nearly half the time, those answers are wrong, misleading, or just       plain made up (anyone who's dealt with the nonsense of Apple's AI-written       headlines can relate).               The report dug into how ChatGPT, Microsoft Copilot, Google Gemini, and       Perplexity handle news queries across 14 languages in 18 countries. The        report analyzed over 3,000 individual responses provided by the AI tools.       Professional journalists from 22 public media outlets evaluated each answer       for accuracy, sourcing, and how well it discerned news from opinion.               The results were bleak for those relying on AI for their news. The report       found that 45% of all answers had a significant issue, 31% had sourcing       problems, and 20% were simply inaccurate. This isnt just a matter of one or       two embarrassing mistakes, like confusing the Prime Minister of Belgium with       the frontman of a Belgian pop group. The research found deep, structural       issues with how these assistants process and deliver news, regardless of       language, country, or platform.              In some languages, the assistants outright hallucinated details. In others,       they attributed quotes to outlets that hadnt published anything even close to       what was being cited. Context was often missing, with the assistants        sometimes giving simplistic or misleading overviews instead of crucial        nuance. In the worst cases, that could change the meaning of an entire news       story.               Not every assistant was equally problematic. Gemini misfired in a staggering       76% of responses, mostly due to missing or poor sourcing.               Unlike a Google search, which lets users sift through a dozen sources, a       chatbot's answer often feels final. It reads with authority and clarity,       giving the impression that its been fact-checked and edited, when in fact it       may be little more than a fuzzy collage of half-remembered summaries.               Thats part of why the stakes are so high. And why even partnerships like        those between ChatGPT and The Washington Post can't solve the problem       entirely.              AI news literacy               The problem is obvious, especially given how quickly AI assistants are       becoming the go-to interface for news. The study cited the 2025 Reuters       Institutes Digital News Report estimate that 7% of all online news consumers       now use an AI assistant to get their information, and 15% of those under 25.       People are already asking AI to explain the world to them, and the AI is       getting the world wrong a disturbing amount.               If youve ever asked ChatGPT, Gemini, or Copilot to summarize a news event,       youve probably seen one of these imperfect answers in action. ChatGPT's       difficulties with searching for the news are well known at this point. But       maybe you didnt even notice. Thats part of the problem: these tools are often       wrong with such fluency that it doesnt feel like a red flag. Thats why media       literacy and ongoing scrutiny are essential.               To try to improve the situation, the EBU and its partners released a News       Integrity in AI Assistants Toolkit, which serves as an AI literacy starter       pack designed to help developers and journalists alike. It outlines both what       makes a good AI response and what kinds of failures users and media watchdogs       should be looking for.               Even as companies like OpenAI and Google race ahead with faster, slicker       versions of their assistants, these reports show why transparency and       accountability are so important. That doesnt mean AI cant be helpful, even        for curating the endless firehose of news. It does mean that, for now, it       should come with a disclaimer. And even if it doesn't, dont assume the       assistant knows best check your sources, and stick to the most reliable        ones...              ======================================================================       Link to news story:       https://www.techradar.com/ai-platforms-assistants/think-you-can-trust-chatgpt-       and-gemini-to-give-you-the-news-heres-why-you-might-want-to-think-again              $$       --- SBBSecho 3.28-Linux        * Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)       SEEN-BY: 105/81 106/201 128/187 129/14 305 153/7715 154/110 218/700       SEEN-BY: 226/30 227/114 229/110 111 206 300 307 317 400 426 428 470       SEEN-BY: 229/664 700 705 266/512 291/111 320/219 322/757 342/200 396/45       SEEN-BY: 460/58 633/280 712/848 902/26 2320/0 105 304 3634/12 5075/35       PATH: 2320/105 229/426           |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca