[netsroht]

Is my new project [0] also part of the problem? I'm still unsure myself because LLMs also allow us to process data in unprecedented ways. In my specific case, I auto generate stories to highlight different view points based on what people are saying about hot controversial topics on social media.

What's your opinion?

[0] https://zeitgaist.social

[latexr]

> Is my new project also part of the problem?

Yes. In a few ways it’s considerably worse. Your website is referencing major world events, including war and freedom of press, by leveraging uninformed comments from the web (many of them themselves written by AI). That would be a problem even if your content weren’t auto-generated (random comments don’t make good or accurate journalism) but it’s worse when it’s churned at a high rate and introduces its own false interpretations.

[netsroht]

Thanks for your input. This website should neither compete with nor replace regular journalism. What I try to achieve here is to be able to break free from social media silos where usually people are in kind of bubble. No one can read this many comments and people usually tend to read only comments / conversations where they align with their believes. Hence, I try to highlight different view points along with contrasting opinions (across several different social media platforms) to get an overview--not necessarily fact-based. These stories aren't supposed to push any agenda down anyone's throat.

Since this project just went live I'm still figuring out how to communicate that.

[latexr]

> This website should neither compete with nor replace regular journalism.

That’s good in theory, but people will use it like that anyway. We’re living in an era of rampant misinformation. Provable truths we’ve know for thousands of years are being called into question (the shape of the Earth). Even people who should know to do their own research (see recent case of lawyers using ChatGPT) are taking AI output as unquestionable truth. Your website won’t eliminate bias, it will only give people more sources to cherry pick.

> Hence, I try to highlight different view points along with contrasting opinions

Which exacerbates the issue. If we can prove the Earth is a sphere and 99% of people understand that, making it seem like the “contrasting opinion” is equally valid and deserves the same weighted consideration makes the problem worse, not better. John Oliver illustrated the problem in 2014, using climate change as the example.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjuGCJJUGsg

[danielbln]

Why do all the images look deep fried?

[netsroht]

Because I intentionally process them with a very rudimentary "cartoonizer" in order to distinguish from a regular news articles and to emphasize that these stories are not written by humans. I don't know yet whether this helps.

[cyberneticist]

It looks like it could be interesting but 'Public Doubts Over Musk's Combat Readiness' is exactly what I wish I never had to read ever again.

There needs to be a dial between 100% stories about Prigozhin/wagner and 100% stories about Elon Musk's narcissistic press headline grab of the week.