News

35724 readers

2623 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.

Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.

7. No duplicate posts.

If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.

9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.

All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.

10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

JonsJava@lemmy.world

gedaliyah@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world

174

‘Disinformation on steroids’: is the US prepared for AI’s influence on the election? (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 2 years ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

24 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Robocalls of President Biden already confused primary voters in New Hampshire – but measures to curb the technology could be too little too late

The AI election is here.

Already this year, a robocall generated using artificial intelligence targeted New Hampshire voters in the January primary, purporting to be President Joe Biden and telling them to stay home in what officials said could be the first attempt at using AI to interfere with a US election. The “deepfake” calls were linked to two Texas companies, Life Corporation and Lingo Telecom.

It’s not clear if the deepfake calls actually prevented voters from turning out, but that doesn’t really matter, said Lisa Gilbert, executive vice-president of Public Citizen, a group that’s been pushing for federal and state regulation of AI’s use in politics.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Ooops@kbin.social -3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Nope.

Or to use you analogy: It's like discussing bans of kerosin to fix the fire instead of acknowledging that they are pouring gasoline on it.

There are good reasons to discuss limiting AI. But this discussion is somewhere between stupidity and diversion. It will not change the fact that a lot of todays (especially social) media is running on narratives, bullshit and desinformation. That's not new and AI will barely be able to make it even worse.

This none-topic is however very useful in ignoring the underlying issue (lack of media competence and education) and diverting from the actual risks of AI (surveilance).

[–] criitz@reddthat.com 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

I get your point. I would disagree that AI will "barely" make it worse, since it's basically a tool to churn out disinformation at a higher order of magnitude than ever before. However, I do agree that targeting AI isn't the solution; once the tools exist you can't put them back in the box. We should be focusing on how to get our society to value truth again.