The Murdoch Effect: Outstanding Information 24×7
October 2, 2023
Note: This essay is the work of a real and still-alive dinobaby. No smart software involved, just a dumb humanoid.
Rupert Murdoch is finally retiring and leaving his propaganda empire to his son Lachlan, who may or may not be even more right-wing than dear old dad. While other outlets ponder what this means for the future of News Corp, Gizmodo examines “All the Ways Rupert Murdoch Left his Grubby Fingerprints on Tech.” Writer Kyle Barr writes:
“You don’t become the biggest name in worldwide media without also becoming something of a major influence on tech. With his direct influence now waning, we can do a bit of an obituary on the mogul’s efforts to influence the world of tech, and how both his direct and unintended efforts have contributed to the shape of our current digital landscape. News Corp wanted to be the biggest name in digital media, and at every step it failed to compete with other big names, leaving it to rely on the bread and butter of its conservative news apparatus. Murdoch’s billions were involved in consolidating the world’s online media experience. His no-holds-barred operating philosophy would end up violating people’s privacy and setting us up for the state of current social media and content streaming. All the while, News Corp’s entities would struggle to find an actual, legitimate foothold in the digital frontier. Instead, Fox News and other Murdoch-owned brands facilitated a new media environment where disinformation ruled the day and truth was laid aside for conservative grievance.”
The write-up shares 11 indelible blotches Murdoch made on the tech landscape in slideshow form. A few key moments include buying up MySpace, thereby clearing the way for Facebook and its countless consequences; helping Mr. Trump rise to power; and buying and forwarding the decimation of one of my favorite childhood institutions, National Geographic. A couple noteworthy fumbles include investment in the fraudulent Theranos and the Dominion Lawsuit against Fox News. See the article for more of Barr’s examples. Now, we wonder, what marks will the junior Murdoch make?
Cynthia Murrell, October 2, 2023
If It Looks Like a Library, It Must Be Bad
September 25, 2023
The Internet Archive is the best digital archive that preserves the Internet’s past as well as the old media, out of print books, and more. The Internet Archive (IA) has been the subject of various legal battles regarding copyright infringement, especially in its project to scan and lend library books. Publishers Weekly details the results of the recent court battle: “Judgment Entered In Publishers, Internet Copyright Case.”
Judge John G. Koeltl issued a summary judgment decision that the Internet Archive did violate copyright and infringed on the holders’ rights. The IA and the plaintiffs reached an semi-agreement about distributing digital copies of copyrighted material but the details are not finalized. The IA plans to appeal the judge’s decision. A large continent of record labels are also suing the IA for violating music copyright.
The IA has a noble mission but it should respect copyright holders. The Subreddit DataHoarder has a swan song for the archive: “The Internet Archive Will Die-Any Serious Attempts At Archiving It?” User mikemikehindpart laments about the IA’s demise and blames the IA’s leadership for the potential shutdown. His biggest concern is about preserving the archive:
“I can’t really figure out any non-conspiratorial explanation as to why the IA people have not organized a grand archiving of the IA itself while there is still time. Is there any such initiative going on that one could join?”
User mikemikehindpart lambasts the IA leaders and claims they will go down in as self-proclaimed martyrs while dutifully handing over their hard drives if authorities come knocking. This user wants to preserve the archive especially defunct software, old Web sites, and other media that is not preserved anywhere else:
“fear is that the courts will soon order the site to be suspended while the trial is ongoing, so as to not cause further harm to the rights holders. Like turning off a switch, poof.
Eventually the entire archive will be ordered destroyed, not just the books and music. And piracy of popular books and music will continue like nothing happened, but all those website snapshots, blogs and lost software will simply disappear, like so many Yahoo! groups did.”
The comments vary on efforts how to start efforts to preserve the IA, to non-helpful non-sequiturs, and a few realistic posts that the IA may continue. The realistic posts agree the IA could continue if it stop sharing the copyrighted material and a consensus might be reached among IA and its “enemies.”
There are also comments that point to a serious truth: no one else is documenting the Internet, especially free stuff. One poster suggested that the Library of Congress should partner with the IA. I see absolutely nothing wrong with that idea.
Whitney Grace, September 21, 2023
Will the Cloud Energize Google or Just Generate Marketing Material?
September 12, 2023
Note: This essay is the work of a real and still-alive dinobaby. No smart software involved, just a dumb humanoid.
I read an article in Forbes (once the capitalist tool and now a tool for capitalists I think) titled “How Google Cloud Is Leveraging Generative AI To Outsmart Competition.” The competition? Does this mean AI entities in China, quasi-monopolies like Facebook (aka Meta) and Microsoft, or tiny start ups with piles of venture funding?
A decider in the publishing sector learns how to make it rain money. Is the method similar to that of the era of Yellow Journalism? Nope. The approach is squarely in line with Madison Avenue’s traditional approach. Thanks, Mother MidJourney. No red alert. Try to scramble up the gradient descent today, please.
The article’s title signals content marketing to me. As I read through the essay, it struck me as product placement.
Let me cite a couple of examples:
First, consider this passage:
Compared to Cloud TPU v4, the new Google Cloud TPU v5e has up to 2x higher training performance per dollar and up to 2.5x higher inference performance per dollar for LLMs and generative AI models. … Google is introducing Multislice technology in preview to make it easier to scale up training jobs, allowing users to quickly scale AI models beyond the boundaries of physical TPU pods—up to tens of thousands of Cloud TPU v5e or TPU v4 chips.
The “information” seems to come from a technical source proud of the advanced developments at the beloved Google. I would suggest that the information payload of the passage is zero for a person working in a Fortune 1000 company engaged in retail or financial services. In my opinion, the information is not even useful for marketing. Forbes is writing for the people not in the Google AI parade.
What about this passage?
Having its own foundation models enables Google to iterate faster based on usage patterns and customer feedback. Since the announcement of PaLM2 at Google I/O in April 2023, the company has enhanced the foundation model to support 32,000 token context windows and 38 new languages. Similarly, Codey, the foundation model for code completion, offers up to a 25% quality improvement in major supported languages for code generation and code chat. The primary benefit of owning the foundation model is the ability to customize it for specific industries and use cases.
Let’s set aside the tokens thing and the assertion about “25 percent quality improvement” and get to the point: “The primary benefit of owning the foundation model is the ability to customize it for specific industries and use cases.” To me, I think that Google wants control: The foundation, the tools for building, and the use cases. Since these are software, Google benefits because it furthers its alleged monopoly grip on information. Furthermore, Google as a super user can easily inject for fee, weaponized, or shaped content into the workflows to achieve its objective: Money. I suppose some of the people in the parade will get a payoff like a drink of Google-Ade. But the winner is Google.
My view of this “real” news write up is a recycling of comments I have offered in my essays since the days of Backrub:
- Google’s technology is designed to allow control of information
- The methods are those of other alleged monopolies: Control and distribution to generate money and toll booths
- The executives are unable to break out of the high school science club bubble in which they think, explain, and operate.
I wonder if Malcolm Forbes would be happy with this “real” news about Google, the number three cloud provider making a play to mash up infrastructure, information processing, and monetization in an objective news story?
My hunch is that he would want to ride his Harley up Broadway to get away from those who have confused product placement with hard reporting.
Stephen E Arnold, September 12, 2023
Gannett: Whoops! AI Cost Cutting Gets Messy
September 6, 2023
Note: This essay is the work of a real and still-alive dinobaby. No smart software involved, just a dumb humanoid.
Gannett, the “real” news bastion of excellence experimented with smart software. The idea is that humanoids are expensive, unreliable, and tough to manage. Software — especially smart software — is just “set it an forget it.”
A young manager / mother appears in distress after her smart software robot spilled the mild. Thanks, MidJourney. Not even close to what I requested.
That was the idea in the Gannett carpetland. How did that work out?
“Gannett to Pause AI Experiment after Botched High School Sports Articles” reports:
Newspaper chain Gannett has paused the use of an artificial intelligence tool to write high school sports dispatches after the technology made several major flubs in articles in at least one of its papers.
The estimable Gannett organization’s effort generated some online buzz. The CNN article adds:
The reports were mocked on social media for being repetitive, lacking key details, using odd language and generally sounding like they’d been written by a computer with no actual knowledge of sports.
That statement echoes my views of MBAs with zero knowledge of business making bonehead management decisions. Gannett is well managed; therefore, the executives are not responsible for the decision to use smart software to cut costs and expand the firm’s “real” news coverage.
I wonder if the staff terminated would volunteer to return to work to write “real” news? You know. The hard stuff like high school sports articles.
Stephen E Arnold, September 6, 2023
Content Moderation: Modern Adulting Is Too Much Work
August 28, 2023
Note: This essay is the work of a real and still-alive dinobaby. No smart software involved, just a dumb humanoid.
Content moderation requires editorial policies. Editorial policies cost money. Editorial policies must be communicated. Editorial policies must be enforced by individuals trained in what information is in bounds or out of bounds. Commercial database companies had editorial policies. One knew what was “in” Compendex, Predicasts, Business Dateline, and and similar commercial databases. Some of these professional publishers have worked to keep the old-school approach in place to serve their customers. Other online services dumped the editorial policies approach to online information because it was expensive and silly. I think that lax or no editorial policies is a bad idea. One can complain about how hard a professional online service was or is to use, but one knows the information placed into the database.
“No, I won’t take out the garbage. That’s a dirty job,” says the petulant child. Thanks, MidJourney, you did not flash me the appeal message this morning.
Fun fact. Business Dateline, originally created by the Courier Journal & Louisville Times, was the first online commercial database to include corrections to stories made by the service’s sources. I am not sure if that policy is still in place. I think today’s managers will have cost in mind. Extras like accuracy are going to be erased by the belief that the more information one has, the less a mistake means.
I thought about adulting and cost control when I read “Following Elon Musk’s Lead, Big Tech Is Surrendering to Disinformation.” The “real” news story reports:
Social media companies are receding from their role as watchdogs against political misinformation, abandoning their most aggressive efforts to police online falsehoods in a trend expected to profoundly affect the 2024 presidential election.
Creating, producing, and distributing electronic information works when those involved have a shared belief in accuracy, appropriateness, and the public good. One those old-fashioned ideas are discarded what’s the result? From my point of view, look around. What does one see in different places in the US and elsewhere? What can be believed? What is socially-acceptable behavior?
When one defines adulting in terms of cost, civil life is eroded in my opinion. Defining responsibility in terms of one’s self interest is one thing that seems to be the driving force of many decisions. I am glad I am a dinobaby. I am glad I am old. At least we tried to enforce editorial policies for ABI/INFORM, Business Dateline, the Health Reference Center, and the other electronic projects in which I was involved. Even our early Internet service ThePoint (Top 5% of the Internet) which became part of Lycos many years ago had an editorial policy.
Ah, the good old days when motivated professionals worked to provide accurate, reliable reference information. For those involved in those projects, I thank you. For those like the companies mentioned in the cited WaPo story, your adulting is indeed a childish response to an important task.
What is the fix? One approach is the Chinese government / TikTok paying Oracle to moderate TikTok content. I wonder what the punishment for doing a “bad” job is. Is this the method to make “correct” decisions? The surveillance angle is an expensive solution. What’s the alternative?
Stephen E Arnold, August 28, 2023
Elsevier Boosts Scopus With Generative AI
August 21, 2023
Note: This essay is the work of a real and still-alive dinobaby. No smart software involved, just a dumb humanoid.
Generative AI algorithms aka AI assistants are technology’s latest and greatest tool. Its buzzword status makes every industry want an AI algorithm designed specifically for them. Even Elsevier, the large international academic publisher and distributor of data analytics and scientific information, adopted a generative AI tool, says the press release: “Elsevier takes Scopus To The Next Level With Generative AI.”
Elsevier released the first version of Scopus AI, a new tool that combines Scopus’s peer-reviewed literature database with generative AI. Scopus Ai will allow researchers to get faster collaboration, share information, and gain deeper insights. This is not Elsevier’s first project using AI algorithms. Elsevier has experimented with AI for over a decade.
While it is easier than ever to access information, researchers still encounter challenges regarding access, misinformation, lack of transparency, and information overload. Scopus AI minimizes these difficulties:
“Scopus AI provides easy-to-read topic summaries based on trusted content from over 27,000 academic journals, from more than 7,000 publishers worldwide, with over 1.8 billion citations, and includes over 17 million author profiles. Content is rigorously vetted and selected by an independent review board, that is made up of 17 world-renowned scientists, researchers and librarians who represent the major scientific disciplines. Researchers can quickly dig deeper and explore these topics in several ways, including suggested follow-up questions and links to the original research.”
The Scopus AI offers summarized abstracts, “Go Deeper Links” for further research exploration, natural language queries, and visual maps showing interconnections between information.
Scopus AI is in its initial phase and being tested by 15,000 researchers. The full product launch will be in early 2024.
Scopus AI is being marketed as an objective research tool that will weed out misinformation, but it is still meant to make revenue. Some of the research in Scopus is non-reproducible and peer SEO is used to make certain papers rise to the top of search results. Scopus AI is bound to have other biased issues but in theory it sounds great.
Whitney Grace, August 21, 2023
A Hacker Recommends Hacking Books
August 11, 2023
Note: This essay is the work of a real and still-alive dinobaby. No smart software involved, just a dumb humanoid.
Hacxx, a self-identified posting freak, has published a list of “20 Best Free Hacking Books 2023.” I checked the post on Sinister.ly and noted that the list of books did not include links to the “free” versions. I asked one of my research team to do a quick check to see if these books were free. Not surprisingly most were available for sale. O’Reilly titles were free if one signed up for that publisher’s services. A couple were posted on a PDF download site. We think the list is helpful. For those interested in the list and where the books Hacxx says are “the best”, we have arranged them in alphabetical order. Authors should be compensated for their work even if the subject is one that some might view as controversial. Right, Hacxx?
- Advanced Penetration Testing https://www.amazon.com/Advanced-Penetration-Testing-Hacking-Networks/dp/1119367689 [Less than $30US]
- Basics of Hacking and Penetration Testing https://www.amazon.com/Basics-Hacking-Penetration-Testing-Ethical/dp/0124116442?tag=50kft00-20
- Black Hat Python: Python Programming for Hackers and Pentesters https://www.amazon.com/Black-Hat-Python-Programming-Pentesters/dp/1593275900?tag=50kft00-20 [Less than $33US]
- Blue Team Handbook: Incident Response Edition https://www.amazon.com/Blue-Team-Handbook-condensed-Responder/dp/1500734756?tag=50kft00-20 [Less than $17]
- CISSP All-In-One Exam Guide https://www.amazon.com/CISSP-All-One-Guide-Ninth/dp/1260467376?tag=50kft00-20 [Less than $60US]
- Computer Hacking Beginners Guide https://www.amazon.com/Computer-Hacking-Beginners-Guide-Penetration-ebook/dp/B01N4FFHMW/ref=sr_1_1?crid=2TKYVD64M3NLS&keywords=.+Computer+Hacking+Beginners+Guide&qid=1691702342&sprefix=computer+hacking+beginners+guide%2Caps%2C91&sr=8-1 [$1US for Kindle edition]
- Ghost in the Wires https://www.amazon.com/Ghost-Wires-Adventures-Worlds-Wanted/dp/0316037729?tag=50kft00-20 [Less than $20US]
- Gray Hat Hacking: The Ethical Hacker’s Handbook, Sixth Edition https://www.amazon.com/Gray-Hat-Hacking-Ethical-Handbook/dp/1264268947?tag=50kft00-20 [Less than $46US]
- Hackers Playbook 2 https://www.amazon.com/Hacker-Playbook-Practical-Penetration-Testing/dp/1980901759/ref=sr_1_2?crid=3OWZ8UCLX5ANU&keywords=.+The+Hackers+Playbook+2&qid=1691701682&sprefix=the+hackers+playbook+2%2Caps%2C85&sr=8-2 [Less than $30]
- Hacking: Computer Hacking Beginners Guide https://pdfroom.com/books/hacking-computer-hacking-beginners-guide/p0q2J8GodxE [Free download]
- Hacking: The Art of Exploitation, 2nd Edition https://www.amazon.com/Hacking-Art-Exploitation-Jon-Erickson/dp/1593271441/ref=sr_1_1?crid=BY25O5JGDY95&keywords=Hacking%3A+The+Art+of+Exploitation%2C+2nd+Edition&qid=1691702542&sprefix=hacking+the+art+of+exploitation%2C+2nd+edition%2Caps%2C116&sr=8-1 [Less than $30US]
- Hash Crack: Password Cracking Manual https://www.amazon.com/Hash-Crack-Password-Cracking-Manual/dp/1793458618?tag=50kft00-20 [Less than $15]
- Kali Linux Revealed: Mastering the Penetration Testing Distribution https://www.amazon.com/Kali-Linux-Revealed-Penetration-Distribution/dp/0997615605?tag=50kft00-20 [Less than $40US]
- Mastering Metasploit https://github.com/PacktPublishing/Mastering-Metasploit-Third-Edition [No charge as of August 10, 2023]
- Nmap Network Scanning at https://nmap.org
- Practical Malware Analysis: The Hands-on Guide https://www.amazon.com/Practical-Malware-Analysis-Hands-Dissecting/dp/1593272901?tag=50kft00-20 [Less than $45US]
- RTFM: Red Team Field Manual https://www.amazon.com/RTFM-Red-Team-Field-Manual/dp/1075091837/ref=sr_1_2?crid=16SFXUJRL3LMR&keywords=RTFM%3A+Red+Team+Field+Manual&qid=1691701596&sprefix=rtfm+red+team+field+manual%2Caps%2C104&sr=8-2 [This version is about $12US]
- Social Engineering: The Science of Human Hacking https://www.amazon.com/Social-Engineering-Science-Human-Hacking-dp-111943338X/dp/111943338X/ref=dp_ob_title_bk [Less than $21US]
- Web Application Hacker’s Handbook https://edu.anarcho-copy.org/Against%20Security%20-%20Self%20Security/Dafydd%20Stuttard,%20Marcus%20Pinto%20-%20The%20web%20application%20hacker’s%20handbook_%20finding%20and%20exploiting%20security%20flaws-Wiley%20(2011).pdf [This is the second edition]
- Web Hacking 101 https://pdfroom.com/books/web-hacking-101/E1d4DO6ydOb [Allegedly free]
Stephen E Arnold, August 11, 2023
Yet Another Way to Spot AI Generated Content
July 21, 2023
![Vea4_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_t[1]](http://arnoldit.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Vea4_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_t1-36.gif "Vea4_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_t[1]")
Note: This essay is the work of a real and still-alive dinobaby. No smart software involved, just a dumb humanoid.
The dramatic emergence of ChatGPT has people frantically searching for ways to distinguish AI-generated content from writing by actual humans. Naturally, many are turning to AI solutions to solve an AI problem. Some tools have been developed that detect characteristics of dino-baby writing, like colloquialisms and emotional language. Unfortunately for the academic community, these methods work better on Reddit posts and Wikipedia pages than academic writings. After all, research papers have employed a bone-dry writing style since long before the emergence of generative AI.
Which tea cup is worth thousands and which is a fabulous fake? Thanks, MidJourney. You know your cups or you are in them.
Cell Reports Physical Science details the development of a niche solution in the ad article, “Distinguishing Academic Science Writing from Humans or ChatGPT with Over 99% Accuracy Using Off-the-Shelf Machine Learning Tools.” We learn:
“In the work described herein, we sought to achieve two goals: the first is to answer the question about the extent to which a field-leading approach for distinguishing AI- from human-derived text works effectively at discriminating academic science writing as being human-derived or from ChatGPT, and the second goal is to attempt to develop a competitive alternative classification strategy. We focus on the highly accessible online adaptation of the RoBERTa model, GPT-2 Output Detector, offered by the developers of ChatGPT, for several reasons. It is a field-leading approach. Its online adaptation is easily accessible to the public. It has been well described in the literature. Finally, it was the winning detection strategy used in the two most similar prior studies. The second project goal, to build a competitive alternative strategy for discriminating scientific academic writing, has several additional criteria. We sought to develop an approach that relies on (1) a newly developed, relevant dataset for training, (2) a minimal set of human-identified features, and (3) a strategy that does not require deep learning for model training but instead focuses on identifying writing idiosyncrasies of this unique group of humans, academic scientists.”
One of these idiosyncrasies, for example, is a penchant for equivocal terms like “but,” “however,” and “although.” Developers used the open source XGBoost software library for this project. The write-up describes the tool’s development and results at length, so navigate there for those details. But what happens, one might ask, the next time ChatGPT levels up? and the next? and so on? We are assured developers have accounted for this game of cat and mouse and will release updated tools quickly each time the chatbot evolves. What a winner—for the marketing team, that is.
Cynthia Murrell, July 21, 2023
Threads and Twitter: A Playground Battle for the Ages
July 18, 2023
![Vea4_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_t[1]](http://arnoldit.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Vea4_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_t1-38.gif "Vea4_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_t[1]")
Note: This essay is the work of a real and still-alive dinobaby. No smart software involved, just a dumb humanoid.
Twitter helped make some people famous. No big name publisher needed. Just an algorithm and a flow of snappy comments. Fame. Money. A platformer, sorry, I meant platform.
Is informed, objective analysis of Facebook and Twitter needed? Sure, but the approach taken by some is more like an argument at a school picnic over the tug –of – war teams. Which team will end up with grass stains? Which will get the ribbon with the check mark? MidJourney developed this original art object.
Now that Twitter has gone Musky, those who may perceive themselves as entitled to a blue check, algorithmic love, and a big, free megaphone are annoyed. At least that’s how I understand “Five Reasons Threads Could Still Go the Distance.” This essay is about the great social media dust up between those who love Teslas and those who can find some grace in the Zuck.
Wait, wasn’t the Zuck the subject of some criticism? Cambridge Analytic-type activities and possibly some fancy dancing with the name of the company, the future of the metaverse, and expanding land holdings in Hawaii? Forget that.
I learned in the article, which is flavored with some business consulting advice from a famous social media personality:
It’s always a fool’s errand to judge the prospects of a new social network a couple weeks into its history.
So what is the essay about? Exactly.
I learned from the cited essay:
Twitter’s deterioration continues to accelerate. Ad revenue is down by 50 percent, according to Musk, and — despite the company choosing not to pay many of its bills — the company is losing money. Rate limits continue to make the site unusable to many free users, and even some paid ones. Spam is overwhelming users’ direct messages so much that the company disabled open DMs to free users. The company has lately been reduced to issuing bribe-like payouts to a handful of hand-picked creators, many of whom are aligned with right-wing politics. If that’s not a death spiral, what is?
Wow, a death spiral at the same time Threads may be falling in love with “rate limits.”
Can the Zuck can kill off Twitter. Here’s hoping. But there is only one trivial task to complete, according to the cited article:
To Zuckerberg, the concept has been proved out. The rest is simply an execution problem. [Emphasis added]
As that lovable influencer, social media maven, and management expert Peter Drucker observed:
What gets measured, gets managed.
Isn’t it early days for measurement? Instagram was a trampoline for Threads. The Musk managment modifications seem to be working exactly as the rocket scientist planned them to function. What’s billions in losses mean to a person whose rockets don’t blow up too often.
Several observations:
- Analyzing Threads and Twitter is a bit like a school yard argument, particularly when the respective big dogs want to fight in a cage in Las Vegas
- The possible annoyance or mild outrage from those who loved the good old free Twitter is palpable
- Social media remains an interesting manifestation of human behavior.
Net net: I find social media a troubling innovation. But it does create news which some find as vital as oxygen, water, and clicks. Yes, clicks. The objective I believe.
Stephen E Arnold, July 18, 2023
Step 1: Test AI Writing Stuff. Step 2: Terminate Humanoids. Will Outrage Prevent the Inevitable?
July 5, 2023
![Vea4_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_t[1]](http://arnoldit.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Vea4_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_t1-2.gif "Vea4_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_t[1]")
Note: This essay is the work of a real and still-alive dinobaby. No smart software involved, just a dumb humanoid.
I am fascinated by the information (allegedly actual factual) in “Gizmodo and Kotaku Staff Furious After Owner Announces Move to AI Content.” Part of my interest is the subtitle:
God, this is gonna be such a f***ing nightmare.
Ah, for whom, pray tell. Probably not for the owners, who may see a pot of gold at the end of the smart software rainbow; for example, Costs Minus Humans Minus Health Care Minus HR Minus Miscellaneous Humanoid costs like latte makers, office space, and salaries / bonuses. What do these produce? More money (value) for the lucky most senior managers and selected stakeholders. Humanoids lose; software wins.
A humanoid writer sits at desk and wonders if the smart software will become a pet rock or a creature let loose to ruin her life by those who want a better payoff.
For the humanoids, it is hasta la vista. Assume the quality is worse? Then the analysis requires quantifying “worse.” Software will be cheaper over a time interval, expensive humans lose. Quality is like love and ethics. Money matters; quality becomes good enough.
Will, fury or outrage or protests make a difference? Nope.
The write up points out:
“AI content will not replace my work — but it will devalue it, place undue burden on editors, destroy the credibility of my outlet, and further frustrate our audience,” Gizmodo journalist Lin Codega tweeted in response to the news. “AI in any form, only undermines our mission, demoralizes our reporters, and degrades our audience’s trust.” “Hey! This sucks!” tweeted Kotaku writer Zack Zwiezen. “Please retweet and yell at G/O Media about this! Thanks.”
Much to the delight of her significant others, the “f***ing nightmare” is from the creative, imaginative humanoid Ashley Feinberg.
An ideal candidate for early replacement by a software system and a list of stop words.
Stephen E Arnold, July 5, 2023
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
