Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Darkly)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo
  1. Home
  2. Uncategorized
  3. What's going on here?

What's going on here?

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Uncategorized
185 Posts 105 Posters 0 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • chato.exeU chato.exe

    @mttaggart oh man, i wish i could see the comments

    TaggartM This user is from outside of this forum
    TaggartM This user is from outside of this forum
    Taggart
    wrote last edited by
    #173

    @umbu https://infosec.exchange/@mttaggart/116070822568559995

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • TaggartM Taggart

      What's going on here? The matplotlib maintainer this story is about correctly notes that all the quotes from his post in the article are made up.

      UPDATE: Link was pulled; see below.

      https://arstechnica.com/ai/2026/02/after-a-routine-code-rejection-an-ai-agent-published-a-hit-piece-on-someone-by-name

      cetanC This user is from outside of this forum
      cetanC This user is from outside of this forum
      cetan
      wrote last edited by
      #174

      @mttaggart is an AI agent responsible for the one down vote in that screenshot? πŸ€”πŸ˜†

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • AliideA Aliide

        @mttaggart @theorangetheme I'm genuinely confused about how this was allowed to happen. I tend to assume Ars has better editorial processes than some of the places I've worked, and both writers have long-term specialisations. My most charitable explanation is that someone created a version that they though would be funny and that was accidentally published. Very curious to see what their investigation yields.

        AliideA This user is from outside of this forum
        AliideA This user is from outside of this forum
        Aliide
        wrote last edited by
        #175

        @mttaggart

        Seems like it very much was the consequence of writers using AI ..!

        Edit: or potentially an editor, would be good if they specified which β€” and either way, it slipped through the editorial process.

        https://arstechnica.com/staff/2026/02/editors-note-retraction-of-article-containing-fabricated-quotations

        #tech #ai #technews #slop #journalism #media

        Mark KoekM 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • AliideA Aliide

          @mttaggart

          Seems like it very much was the consequence of writers using AI ..!

          Edit: or potentially an editor, would be good if they specified which β€” and either way, it slipped through the editorial process.

          https://arstechnica.com/staff/2026/02/editors-note-retraction-of-article-containing-fabricated-quotations

          #tech #ai #technews #slop #journalism #media

          Mark KoekM This user is from outside of this forum
          Mark KoekM This user is from outside of this forum
          Mark Koek
          wrote last edited by
          #176

          @aliide @mttaggart looks like an adequate response by the editor

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • TaggartM Taggart

            These were pulled too, but thank you again Wayback:

            https://web.archive.org/web/20260213211721/https://arstechnica.com/civis/threads/after-a-routine-code-rejection-an-ai-agent-published-a-hit-piece-on-someone-by-name.1511649/

            TaggartM This user is from outside of this forum
            TaggartM This user is from outside of this forum
            Taggart
            wrote last edited by
            #177

            The final chapter? The statement from Ars:

            On Friday afternoon, Ars Technica published an article containing fabricated quotations generated by an AI tool and attributed to a source who did not say them. That is a serious failure of our standards. Direct quotations must always reflect what a source actually said.

            https://arstechnica.com/staff/2026/02/editors-note-retraction-of-article-containing-fabricated-quotations

            Dave Wilburn :donor:D James πŸ¦‰ #FBPE πŸ‡ͺπŸ‡ΊF Analog AIR TaggartM Fink :antifa:F 5 Replies Last reply
            1
            0
            • TaggartM Taggart

              The final chapter? The statement from Ars:

              On Friday afternoon, Ars Technica published an article containing fabricated quotations generated by an AI tool and attributed to a source who did not say them. That is a serious failure of our standards. Direct quotations must always reflect what a source actually said.

              https://arstechnica.com/staff/2026/02/editors-note-retraction-of-article-containing-fabricated-quotations

              Dave Wilburn :donor:D This user is from outside of this forum
              Dave Wilburn :donor:D This user is from outside of this forum
              Dave Wilburn :donor:
              wrote last edited by
              #178

              @mttaggart

              Good. No quibbling, just taking responsibility with transparency.

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • TaggartM Taggart

                The final chapter? The statement from Ars:

                On Friday afternoon, Ars Technica published an article containing fabricated quotations generated by an AI tool and attributed to a source who did not say them. That is a serious failure of our standards. Direct quotations must always reflect what a source actually said.

                https://arstechnica.com/staff/2026/02/editors-note-retraction-of-article-containing-fabricated-quotations

                James πŸ¦‰ #FBPE πŸ‡ͺπŸ‡ΊF This user is from outside of this forum
                James πŸ¦‰ #FBPE πŸ‡ͺπŸ‡ΊF This user is from outside of this forum
                James πŸ¦‰ #FBPE πŸ‡ͺπŸ‡Ί
                wrote last edited by
                #179

                @mttaggart Was the article about how good AI is?

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • TaggartM Taggart

                  The final chapter? The statement from Ars:

                  On Friday afternoon, Ars Technica published an article containing fabricated quotations generated by an AI tool and attributed to a source who did not say them. That is a serious failure of our standards. Direct quotations must always reflect what a source actually said.

                  https://arstechnica.com/staff/2026/02/editors-note-retraction-of-article-containing-fabricated-quotations

                  Analog AIR This user is from outside of this forum
                  Analog AIR This user is from outside of this forum
                  Analog AI
                  wrote last edited by
                  #180

                  @mttaggart Not "We are sorry for publishing AI slop", just "the quotes should have been verified"? (Edit: it was pointed out to me that if I read the article, the appology was actually for an AI article, not just the quotations. Thanks @mttaggart )

                  TaggartM 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • Analog AIR Analog AI

                    @mttaggart Not "We are sorry for publishing AI slop", just "the quotes should have been verified"? (Edit: it was pointed out to me that if I read the article, the appology was actually for an AI article, not just the quotations. Thanks @mttaggart )

                    TaggartM This user is from outside of this forum
                    TaggartM This user is from outside of this forum
                    Taggart
                    wrote last edited by
                    #181

                    @Retreival9096 There's an apology in the linked post.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • TaggartM Taggart

                      The final chapter? The statement from Ars:

                      On Friday afternoon, Ars Technica published an article containing fabricated quotations generated by an AI tool and attributed to a source who did not say them. That is a serious failure of our standards. Direct quotations must always reflect what a source actually said.

                      https://arstechnica.com/staff/2026/02/editors-note-retraction-of-article-containing-fabricated-quotations

                      TaggartM This user is from outside of this forum
                      TaggartM This user is from outside of this forum
                      Taggart
                      wrote last edited by
                      #182

                      Not quite the final chapter! Benj Edwards has taken responsiblity in this Bluesky post:

                      https://bsky.app/profile/benjedwards.com/post/3mewgow6ch22p

                      For those who won't head over there, a summary:

                      First, this happened while sick with COVID. Second, Edwards claims this was a new experiment using Claude Code to extract source material. Claude refused to process the blog post (because Shambaugh mentions harassment). Edwards then took the blog post text and pasted it into ChatGPT, which evidently is the source of the fictitious quotes. Edwards takes full responsibility and apologizes, recognizing the irony of an AI reporter falling prey to this kind of mistake.

                      AdmiralFrostyA Christina JenniferC 2 Replies Last reply
                      0
                      • TaggartM Taggart

                        Not quite the final chapter! Benj Edwards has taken responsiblity in this Bluesky post:

                        https://bsky.app/profile/benjedwards.com/post/3mewgow6ch22p

                        For those who won't head over there, a summary:

                        First, this happened while sick with COVID. Second, Edwards claims this was a new experiment using Claude Code to extract source material. Claude refused to process the blog post (because Shambaugh mentions harassment). Edwards then took the blog post text and pasted it into ChatGPT, which evidently is the source of the fictitious quotes. Edwards takes full responsibility and apologizes, recognizing the irony of an AI reporter falling prey to this kind of mistake.

                        AdmiralFrostyA This user is from outside of this forum
                        AdmiralFrostyA This user is from outside of this forum
                        AdmiralFrosty
                        wrote last edited by
                        #183

                        @mttaggart

                        You'd hope that an AI reporter would know that you cannot trust an LLM to summarize or search for information, but apparently not.

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • TaggartM Taggart

                          Not quite the final chapter! Benj Edwards has taken responsiblity in this Bluesky post:

                          https://bsky.app/profile/benjedwards.com/post/3mewgow6ch22p

                          For those who won't head over there, a summary:

                          First, this happened while sick with COVID. Second, Edwards claims this was a new experiment using Claude Code to extract source material. Claude refused to process the blog post (because Shambaugh mentions harassment). Edwards then took the blog post text and pasted it into ChatGPT, which evidently is the source of the fictitious quotes. Edwards takes full responsibility and apologizes, recognizing the irony of an AI reporter falling prey to this kind of mistake.

                          Christina JenniferC This user is from outside of this forum
                          Christina JenniferC This user is from outside of this forum
                          Christina Jennifer
                          wrote last edited by
                          #184

                          @mttaggart "Woopsie, I accidentally committed journalistic malpractice."

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • TaggartM Taggart

                            The final chapter? The statement from Ars:

                            On Friday afternoon, Ars Technica published an article containing fabricated quotations generated by an AI tool and attributed to a source who did not say them. That is a serious failure of our standards. Direct quotations must always reflect what a source actually said.

                            https://arstechnica.com/staff/2026/02/editors-note-retraction-of-article-containing-fabricated-quotations

                            Fink :antifa:F This user is from outside of this forum
                            Fink :antifa:F This user is from outside of this forum
                            Fink :antifa:
                            wrote last edited by
                            #185

                            @mttaggart I feel like "the author in question won’t work with ars anymore" would have been a better answer, tbh. Yes this might happen, but really… πŸ™„

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • MarianneN Marianne shared this topic
                            Reply
                            • Reply as topic
                            Log in to reply
                            • Oldest to Newest
                            • Newest to Oldest
                            • Most Votes


                            • Login

                            • Don't have an account? Register

                            • Login or register to search.
                            Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                            • First post
                              Last post
                            0
                            • Categories
                            • Recent
                            • Tags
                            • Popular
                            • World
                            • Users
                            • Groups