1037
Elon Musk Dragged After His Own Chatbot Admits He's A 'Significant Spreader' Of Misinformation
(www.comicsands.com)
this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2024
1037 points (96.8% liked)
Technology
60130 readers
2793 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Don't contribute to malice what can be explained by ignorance.
I hate this saying because a large amount of the time it really is malice.
The saying works for day to day random bullshit. Not when a cocksucker buys a media outlet specifically to spread lies.
To that I'd say, "don't attribute to ignorance what can easily be explained by greed"
What does greed have to do with spreading misinformation? Even the term itself implies ignorance. If it was intentional it would be called disinformation.
Ah yes, Hanlon's razor. Genuinely a great one to keep in mind at all times, along with it's corollary Clarke's law: "Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice."
But in this particular case I think we need the much less frequently cited version by Douglas Hubbard: "Never attribute to malice or stupidity that which can be explained by moderately rational individuals following incentives in a complex system."
adequately explained.
The ignorance doesn't explain where all the money comes from. So malice it is! Lol
We're talking about spreading misinformation, which by definition implies ignorance. If it was intentional it would be called disinformation.
Misinformation is not defined by the knowledge of the one who spreads it (like if the spreader knows that it is wrong), it is therefore a useful word to use in journalism, since, if you would say it is lie or disinformation, you would have to be able to prove that or the victim of your text can sue you for misusing your credibility to spread misinformation (yea, funny irony here) and force you to take the story down.
Don't contribute to ignorance that which can be easily explained by malice and is much more likely to be malice due to their history of malice. The guy is King of bitter malice, the fuck are you saying
just check the money flow and you will quickly figure how this is not true lol
well said malicebot9000!