• XeroxCool@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    13 days ago

    Will this further fuck up the inaccurate nature of AI results? While I’m rooting against shitty AI usage, the general population is still trusting it and making results worse will, most likely, make people believe even more wrong stuff.

    • ladel@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      edit-2
      13 days ago

      The article says it’s not poisoning the AI data, only providing valid facts. The scraper still gets content, just not the content it was aiming for.

      E:

      It is important to us that we don’t generate inaccurate content that contributes to the spread of misinformation on the Internet, so the content we generate is real and related to scientific facts, just not relevant or proprietary to the site being crawled.

      • XeroxCool@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        12 days ago

        Thank you for catching that. Even reading through again, I couldn’t find it while skimming. With the mention of X2 and RSS, I assumed that paragraph would just be more technical description outside my knowledge. Instead, what I did hone in on was

        “No real human would go four links deep into a maze of AI-generated nonsense.”

        Leading me to be pessimistic.