"had to be true, I saw it on the news" is an extremely naive take.
Journalist's are experts in one thing. It isn't technology or social media. Go hop on threads, there's not half the population of the US participating FFS. It's patently obvious. Moreover it isn't illegal. Why wouldn't they misreport?
And the thing is they are reporting the number of shadow accounts they create. If I were a meta investor I would be looking for a class action right about now.
I mean yeah, you just said it... the researcher didn't discover a thing, they categorized it.
Which doesn't sound nearly as noble and cool does it?
Also, nothing is done "in the name of science". Science is a process of observation, not a philosophy or ideology. It isn't a religion or a monarchy. You would no sooner do something "in the name of addition" than you would for science.
Also just because you've installed an instance and it works doesn't mean job done. Could've been simply settings.
I read an article, a recent one, about a kind of tree being "discovered" by some European research team. Within the article, it said the people who lived in that particular forest had known about that kind of tree for ages. They had multiple names for it, uses, etc.
Yet without any irony at all ... They attributed the "discovery" to this European researcher.
This is starting to touch on the root of why they keep calling this "AI", "training", etc. They aren't doing this for strictly marketing, they are attempting to skew public opinion. These companies know intimately how to do that.
They're going to argue that if torrents are legal for educational purposes (ie the loophole that all trackers use), and they're just "training" an "AI" then they're just engaging in education. And an ignorant public might buy it.
These kinds of cases will be viewed as landmark cases in the future and honestly I don't have huge hopes. The history of these companies is engineer first, excuse the lack of ethics later. Or the philosophy of "it's easier to apologize than ask".
Big "I'm the main character" energy here. Enjoy yourself, because people around you don't.
Just an inbox that forwards to Elon so he can laugh at inquiries. Jokes aside, they moved on this one because she was caught as a fake in big and loud fashion (WaPo) and if Twitter didn't, they couldn't keep up any appearance of bipartisanship. WaPo would've just beat the drum louder. This way Twitter hardly even has to comment, and they can deny they promoted the account.
Are you admitting you don't even contribute and yet you deign to judge the people who do?
A fake person affected public opinion by interacting with real people, which is only made possible by society's current relationship with social media. This was done presumably to incite and rage bait for the opposition and supposedly by an outside nation actor, making this an act of cyber warfare. One of many we've seen, and more each day. And guess what? The way you combat that kind of information war is by informing the public, especially that circle of people who actually build these technologies (soooo this sub, pretty much).
It is absolutely not redundant to call it a technology topic. How society interacts with and is affected by technology is an exceedingly important topic within technology and it's continued development it we want it to be for the betterment of humanity and not the enslavement of it. Technology isn't just how the electrons move, that's literally only a teensy tiny part of it.
Be the change you want to see then brother, post what quality content you think ought to be seen and shared. You're allowed to.
Being followed by an idiot != Signing up an account
I can create a billion accounts on my social media instance. Should that matter? No? So why does it matter that Meta did?