brianpeiris@lemmy.ca to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 17 hours agoNo AI* Here - A Response to Mozilla's Next Chapter - Waterfox Blogwww.waterfox.comexternal-linkmessage-square86fedilinkarrow-up1410arrow-down110cross-posted to: privacy@lemmy.mlfirefox@lemmy.ml
arrow-up1400arrow-down1external-linkNo AI* Here - A Response to Mozilla's Next Chapter - Waterfox Blogwww.waterfox.combrianpeiris@lemmy.ca to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 17 hours agomessage-square86fedilinkcross-posted to: privacy@lemmy.mlfirefox@lemmy.ml
minus-squareMac@mander.xyzlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up20arrow-down3·14 hours agoYou sure are relying on the accuracy of the misinformation machine.
minus-squareFaceDeer@fedia.iolinkfedilinkarrow-up7arrow-down14·14 hours agoAnd you sure are relying on just believing whatever you read without any checking whatsoever. Here’s an example of how AI fact checking can find errors in even extremely well-curated data sources.
minus-squareMac@mander.xyzlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4arrow-down5·edit-214 hours ago?? You’re specifically making claims about me in your comment. “Source?” for those claims. Maybe you’ve become so reliant on AI you cant read and understand comments anymore? Put this exchange into ChatGPT and have it explain for you.
minus-squareFaceDeer@fedia.iolinkfedilinkarrow-up4arrow-down3·14 hours agoOkay, so how do you go about the process of fact checking every news article you read?
minus-squareMac@mander.xyzlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4arrow-down2·edit-213 hours agoYou’re never going to believe this: i can take an article at face value because it’s not being routed through a slop generator when i read it. Whether or not a source can be believed to be true is not within the scope of this thread.
minus-squareFaceDeer@fedia.iolinkfedilinkarrow-up4arrow-down2·13 hours agoRight, you take the article at face value. So exactly as I originally said: you sure are relying on just believing whatever you read without any checking whatsoever.
minus-squareasudox@lemmy.asudox.devlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2arrow-down1·13 hours agocertainly not by using llms, that’s for sure
minus-squareFaceDeer@fedia.iolinkfedilinkarrow-up3arrow-down2·13 hours agoOkay, we’ve established how you don’t do it. So how do you go about the process of fact checking every news article you read?
minus-squareasudox@lemmy.asudox.devlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down1·13 hours agoI check the sources.
You sure are relying on the accuracy of the misinformation machine.
And you sure are relying on just believing whatever you read without any checking whatsoever.
Here’s an example of how AI fact checking can find errors in even extremely well-curated data sources.
Source?
Source for what?
??
You’re specifically making claims about me in your comment. “Source?” for those claims.
Maybe you’ve become so reliant on AI you cant read and understand comments anymore? Put this exchange into ChatGPT and have it explain for you.
Okay, so how do you go about the process of fact checking every news article you read?
You’re never going to believe this: i can take an article at face value because it’s not being routed through a slop generator when i read it.
Whether or not a source can be believed to be true is not within the scope of this thread.
Right, you take the article at face value. So exactly as I originally said:
certainly not by using llms, that’s for sure
Okay, we’ve established how you don’t do it. So how do you go about the process of fact checking every news article you read?
I check the sources.