this post was submitted on 15 Dec 2023
110 points (94.4% liked)
Technology
58303 readers
11 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Even the tldr bot forwards such a heavy bias into the delivery of this information, I couldn't even get through it without eye-rolling. I'd like to receive the info, and then be allowed to think for myself.
This isn't journalism - it's a thirsty-for-validation, one-sided take on this topic. This proposal may not be viable in a vacuum, but there may be some interesting ideas that can be taken from it, when the reader isn't being spoonfed the psyche of an author that clearly wants you to agree with them. Like I said - I'd rather either hear both sides fairly, or get the info without it already dripping with the stank of another person's very negative opinion. Whether or not you agree with me, as long as you're thinking for yourself, you're doing it right.
Edited first sentence for clarity.
I agree with you that the article isn’t neutral but I feel like after that dumbfuck manifesto, no one should have to treat anyone at Andreeson Horowitz seriously again.
The tldr bot is pulling directly from the article - it used to use ChatGPT wayy back when it was originally created, but it got expensive for the creator, so now I believe it uses some sentence interpreter library to compare relevance of paragraphs, in combination with semantic HTML tags/markup.
The code for it is on GitHub
I almost wish our bots would remove bias, unless it's some kind of persuasive essay. I'm sure there are some out there.
And to be clear, I'm blaming the author, not the bot. It's just forwarding the sentiment of the author, albeit more succinctly.
Removing things is not sufficient for removing bias. Omission is a kind of bias. You can lie by cherry-picking just some of the truth and skipping the rest
I agree here entirely.
The article is pretty much at fault here, as far as the bot is concerned if garbage goes in, garbage comes out
"I'm a bot, not a miracle worker"