A shocking story was promoted on the “front page” or main feed of Elon Musk’s X on Thursday:

“Iran Strikes Tel Aviv with Heavy Missiles,” read the headline.

This would certainly be a worrying world news development. Earlier that week, Israel had conducted an airstrike on Iran’s embassy in Syria, killing two generals as well as other officers. Retaliation from Iran seemed like a plausible occurrence.

But, there was one major problem: Iran did not attack Israel. The headline was fake.

Even more concerning, the fake headline was apparently generated by X’s own official AI chatbot, Grok, and then promoted by X’s trending news product, Explore, on the very first day of an updated version of the feature.

  • style99
    link
    fedilink
    1773 months ago

    People who deploy AI should be held responsible for the slander and defamation the AI causes.

        • ArxCyberwolf
          link
          fedilink
          English
          143 months ago

          Parker, why does Spider-Man have seven fingers in this photo?!

      • @Railcar8095@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        183 months ago

        Why I imagine Xitter lawyers arguing that was it was neither spoken nor “printed”, they can’t be charged?

        • @shneancy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          273 months ago

          how is it fear mongering when shit like this is happening? AI as it stands is unregulated and will continue to cause issues if left this way

          • @maynarkh@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            English
            53 months ago

            So will self-driving cars, the oil industry, and a bunch of others. The US is a plutocracy, and Musk has enough power to keep playing around with this, so that’s it. If you want actual change, either start organizing for a general strike or a civil war, since stopping Musk is not on the ballot, and most likely won’t be for either of your lifetimes.

            • @melpomenesclevage@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              83 months ago

              I mean, if your problem is just narrowly musk, the one guy, you don’t need a whole war; just one shot.

              I’m not advocating this, just pointing out, you know? Not that I have a problem with turning the class massacre into a class war.

              • @maynarkh@feddit.nl
                link
                fedilink
                English
                13 months ago

                The thing is, the vast majority of terrorist attacks and assassinations are organized by rich people using poor people as pawns to further their political agenda. Such things are rarely born from people who are in touch with society and are compassionate with others.

                9/11 was organized by rich people to get back at other rich people for attacking their business. Even today’s right wing crazies only exist because there is a propaganda machine running on obscene wealth whipping desperate people into a frenzy.

                • @melpomenesclevage@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  1
                  edit-2
                  3 months ago

                  I don’t see what terrorism has to do with this. Unless you mean the practical definition of ‘things that upset the wealthy’. Which is dumb. I want a special scary word for things that upset me.

    • @QuadratureSurfer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      13 months ago

      Well if you read OpenAI’s terms of service, there’s an indemnification clause in there.

      Basically if you get ChatGPT to say something defaming/libellous and then post it, you would foot the legal bill for any lawsuits that may arise from your screenshot of what their LLM produced.

  • @kadu@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    151
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    I wonder how legislation is going to evolve to handle AI. Brazilian law would punish a newspaper or social media platform claiming that Iran just attacked Israel - this is dangerous information that could affect somebody’s life.

    If it were up to me, if your AI hallucinated some dangerous information and provided it to users, you’re personally responsible. I bet if such a law existed in less than a month all those AI developers would very quickly abandon the “oh no you see it’s impossible to completely avoid hallucinations for you see the math is just too complex tee hee” and would actually fix this.

    • @Ottomateeverything@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      973 months ago

      I bet if such a law existed in less than a month all those AI developers would very quickly abandon the “oh no you see it’s impossible to completely avoid hallucinations for you see the math is just too complex tee hee” and would actually fix this.

      Nah, this problem is actually too hard to solve with LLMs. They don’t have any structure or understanding of what they’re saying so there’s no way to write better guardrails… Unless you build some other system that tries to make sense of what the LLM says, but that approaches the difficulty of just building an intelligent agent in the first place.

      So no, if this law came into effect, people would just stop using AI. It’s too cavalier. And imo, they probably should stop for cases like this unless it has direct human oversight of everything coming out of it. Which also, probably just wouldn’t happen.

      • @wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        563 months ago

        Yep. To add on, this is exactly what all the “AI haters” (myself included) are going on about when they say stuff like there isn’t any logic or understanding behind LLMs, or when they say they are stochastic parrots.

        LLMs are incredibly good at generating text that works grammatically and reads like it was put together by someone knowledgable and confident, but they have no concept of “truth” or reality. They just have a ton of absurdly complicated technical data about how words/phrases/sentences are related to each other on a structural basis. It’s all just really complicated math about how text is put together. It’s absolutely amazing, but it is also literally and technologically impossible for that to spontaneously coelesce into reason/logic/sentience.

        Turns out that if you get enough of that data together, it makes a very convincing appearance of logic and reason. But it’s only an appearance.

        You can’t duct tape enough speak and spells together to rival the mass of the Sun and have it somehow just become something that outputs a believable human voice.


        For an incredibly long time, ChatGPT would fail questions along the lines of “What’s heavier, a pound of feathers or three pounds of steel?” because it had seen the normal variation of the riddle with equal weights so many times. It has no concept of one being smaller than three. It just “knows” the pattern of the “correct” response.

        It no longer fails that “trick”, but there’s significant evidence that OpenAI has set up custom handling for that riddle over top of the actual LLM, as it doesn’t take much work to find similar ways to trip it up by using slightly modified versions of classic riddles.

        A lot of supporters will counter “Well I just ask it to tell the truth, or tell it that it’s wrong, and it corrects itself”, but I’ve seen plenty of anecdotes in the opposite direction, with ChatGPT insisting that it’s hallucination was fact. It doesn’t have any concept of true or false.

        • @neatchee@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          23
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          The shame of it is that despite this limitation LLMs have very real practical uses that, much like cryptocurrencies and NFTs did to blockchain, are being undercut by hucksters.

          Tesla has done the same thing with autonomous driving too. They claimed to be something they’re not (fanboys don’t @ me about semantics) and made the REAL thing less trusted and take even longer to come to market.

          Drives me crazy.

          • FlashMobOfOne
            link
            fedilink
            English
            73 months ago

            Yup, and I hate that.

            I really would like to one day just take road trips everywhere without having to actually drive.

            • @neatchee@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              5
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              Right? Waymo is already several times safer than humans and tesla’s garbage, yet municipalities keep refusing them. Trust is a huge problem for them.

              And yes, haters, I know that they still have problems in inclement weather but that’s kinda the point: we would be much further along if it weren’t for the unreasonable hurdles they keep facing because of fear created by Tesla

            • @humorlessrepost@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              2
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              For road trips (i.e. interstates and divided highways), GM’s Super Cruise is pretty much there unless you go through a construction zone. I just went from Atlanta to Knoxville without touching the steering wheel once.

            • @yessikg
              link
              English
              03 months ago

              Trains are really good for that

        • @cygon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          93 months ago

          I love that example. Microsoft’s Copilot (based on GTP-4) immediately doesn’t disappoint:

          Microsoft Copilot: Two pounds of feathers and a pound of lead both weigh the same: two pounds. The difference lies in the material—feathers are much lighter and less dense than lead. However, when it comes to weight, they balance out equally.

          It’s annoying that for many things, like basic programming tasks, it manages to generate reasonable output that is good enough to goat people into trusting it, yet hallucinates very obviously wrong stuff or follows completely insane approaches on anything off the beaten path. Every other day, I have to spend an hour to justify to a coworker why I wrote code this way when the AI has given him another “great” suggestion, like opening a hidden window with an UI control to query a database instead of going through our ORM.

        • @Akisamb@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          13 months ago

          It’s absolutely amazing, but it is also literally and technologically impossible for that to spontaneously coelesce into reason/logic/sentience.

          This is not true. If you train these models on game of Othello, they’ll keep a state of the world internally and use that to predict the next move played (1). To execute addition and multiplication they are executing an algorithm on which they were not explicitly trained (although the gpt family is surprisingly bad at it, due to a badly designed tokenizer).

          These models are still pretty bad at most reasoning tasks. But training on predicting the next word is a perfectly valid strategy, after all the best way to predict what comes after the “=” in 1432 + 212 = is to do the addition.

        • @PopShark@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          13 months ago

          Yep the hallucinations issue happens even in GPT4, in my experience certain topics can bring about potential hallucinations more than others but if ChatGPT (even with GPT4 or whatever other advanced version of it) gets “stuck” on believing its hallucinations the only way to convince it is literally plainly stating the part that’s wrong and directing it to search Bing or the internet some other way specifically for that. Otherwise you just let out a sigh and start a new chat. If you spend too much time negotiating with it that wastes tokens anyway so the chat becomes bloated and it forgets stuff from earlier in the chat, not to mention technically you’re paying for being able to use the more advanced model anyway and yeah basically the more you treat the chat like a normal conversation the worse it is with AI. I guess that’s why “prompt engineering” was or is a thing, whether legitimate or not.

          I did also importantly note that if you pay for credits with OpenAI to use their “playground” to create a specifically customized GPT4 adjusting temperature and response types it takes getting used to because it is WAY different than ChatGPT regardless of which version of GPT you have it set to. It actually kind of blew me away with how much better it “””understood””” software development but the issue is you kind of have to set up chats yourself it’s more complex and you pay per token so mistakes cost you. If it wasn’t such a pain and I had a specific use case I would definitely rather pay for OpenAI credits as needed than their bs “Plus” $20/month subscription for nerfed GPT4 as a chatbot.

      • @kadu@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        223 months ago

        So no, if this law came into effect, people would just stop using AI. And imo, they probably should stop for cases like this unless it has direct human oversight of everything coming out of it.

        Then you and I agree. If AI can be advertised as a source of information but at the same time can’t provide safeguarded information, then there should not be commercial AI. Build tools to help video editing, remove backgrounds from photos, go nuts, but do not position yourself as a source of information.

        Though if fixing AI is at all possible, even if we predict it will only happen after decades of technology improvements, it for sure won’t happen if we are complacent and do not add such legislative restrictions.

    • @rayyy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      33 months ago

      Another of Musk cutting corners to the max and endangering lives but why should he care? He is in control and that is the only thing that matters to him, even if he loses billions of dollars.

  • @sik0fewl@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    893 months ago

    To everyone that goes to “X” to get the “real”, unfiltered news, I hope you can see that it’s not that site anymore.

    • SeedyOne
      link
      fedilink
      English
      29
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Yet, annoyingly, much of the press still uses it to disseminate news.

      I understand journalism is in a rough spot these days and many are there against their will but something needs to change abruptly. This slow exodus is too slow for democracy to survive '24.

    • Queen HawlSera
      link
      fedilink
      English
      43 months ago

      I’d argue it never was anything outside of pulling net celebs names from hats and claiming they were rapists and racists without evidence, and then having them get chased off the internet, destroying their careers in the process and in some cases causing suicides… Unless they actually did it, because then they were rich and could just buy good publicity or start an Alt-Right circle jerk where they can claim “Wokeness” did it.

    • @Fedizen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      13 months ago

      it was the “yell at celebrities” website. The whole “buy a blue check” thing destroyed it.

  • darkmogool
    link
    fedilink
    English
    72
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    “Grok” sounds like a name of a really stupid ork from a D&D capaign.

  • @cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    403 months ago

    Oh, what a surprise. Another AI spat out some more bullshit. I can’t wait until companies finally give up on trying to do everything with AI.

    • Cosmic Cleric
      link
      fedilink
      English
      233 months ago

      I can’t wait until companies finally give up on trying to do everything with AI.

      I don’t think that will ever happen.

      They’re acceptable of AI driving car accidents that causes harm happen. It’s all part of the learning / debugging process to them.

      • JackGreenEarth
        link
        fedilink
        English
        33 months ago

        AI isn’t inherently bad. Once AI cars cause less accidents than human drivers (even if they still cause some accidents) it will be moral to use them on roads.

  • @Nobody@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    353 months ago

    Beware, terminally incompetent interns everywhere. Doing something incredibly damaging to your company over social media on your first day is officially a job that’s been taken by AI.

  • Otter
    link
    fedilink
    English
    163 months ago

    I don’t really understand this headline

    The bot made it? So why was it promoted as trending?

    • @Deceptichum@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      273 months ago

      It’s pretty, trending is based on . . . What’s trending by users.

      Or as the article explains for those who can’t comprehend what trending means.

      Based on our observations, it appears that the topic started trending because of a sudden uptick of blue checkmark accounts (users who pay a monthly subscription to X for Premium features including the verification badge) spamming the same copy-and-paste misinformation about Iran attacking Israel. The curated posts provided by X were full of these verified accounts spreading this fake news alongside an unverified video depicting explosions.

        • @Deceptichum@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          123 months ago

          It does say it’s likely hyperbole, so they probably just tazed and arrested the earthquake.

          Also I’m impressed by the 50,000 to 1,000,000 range for officers deployed. It leaves little room for error.

          • @PopShark@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            23 months ago

            I wonder if the wide margin is the AI trying to formulate logic and numbers in the story but it realizes it doesn’t know how many officers would be needed to shoot the earthquake since it would logically depends on the magnitude of the earthquake which the AI doesn’t know so it figures well alright tectonic plates are rather resistant to firearms discharge and other potential law enforcement tactics so it starts high at 50,000 but decides 1,000,000 is a reasonable cap as there just can’t be more than that many officers present in the state or country

  • IninewCrow
    link
    fedilink
    English
    15
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Same similiar thing happened with major newspapers about 100 / 150 years ago … governments realized that if any one group or company had control over all the information without regulation, businesses will quickly figure out ways to monetize information for the benefit of those with all the money and power. They then had to figure out how to start regulating newspapers and news media in order to maintain some sort of control and sanity to the entire system.

    But like the newspapers of old … no one will do anything about all this until it causes a major crisis or causes a terrible event … or events.

    In the meantime … big corporations controlling 99% of all media and news information will stay unregulated or regulated as little as possible until terrible things happen and society breaks down.

  • yeehaw
    link
    fedilink
    English
    23 months ago

    Not to defend elon here but so what? Is it his job?

    • @cygon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      73 months ago

      I assume that Twitter still has tons of managers and team leads that allowed this and have their own part of the responsibility. However, Musk is known to be a choleric with a mercurial temper, someone who makes grand public announcements and then pushes his companies to release stuff that isn’t nearly ready for production. Often it’s “do or get fired”.

      So… an unshackled AI generating official posts, no human hired to curate the front page, headlines controlled through up-voting by trolls and foreign influence campaigns, all running unchecked in the name of “free speech” – that’s very much on brand for a Musk-run business, I’d say.