totally_human_emdash_user@piefed.blahaj.zone
on 13 Feb 21:34
nextcollapse
FYI, the article was presumably taken down because many of the quotes turned out to have been fabricated, and they said they were investigating this. (I don’t think that they are trying to cover up anything, just that they have not gotten around to written an official response yet, given that this is a recent development.)
threaded - newest
FYI, the article was presumably taken down because many of the quotes turned out to have been fabricated, and they said they were investigating this. (I don’t think that they are trying to cover up anything, just that they have not gotten around to written an official response yet, given that this is a recent development.)
Ugh, that is utterly disappointing to see from Ars Technica. Here’s a bit of context about it: mastodon.social/@nikclayton/116065459933532659
Fortunately, the article was already archived, for what it’s worth: web.archive.org/…/after-a-routine-code-rejection-…
You should edit your original post to use the archive link, as the main link now leads to a 404 error…
Of course they were fabricated, by an AI.
More seriously, which quotes were you referring to?
Sounds like the quotes from the person that wrote the blog
infosec.exchange/@mttaggart/116065340523529645
Blog post about this event by the someone in question: theshamblog.com/an-ai-agent-published-a-hit-piece…
The link to the article leads to a 404.
OP posted a working archive link in the comments…
web.archive.org/…/after-a-routine-code-rejection-…