As I said -- only a matter of time before news orgs lashed out at Apple's lackluster (and evidently dangerously wrong) AI summaries of their work. This is shambolic and the BBC has every right to be furious about it.
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
It will be right for BBC (and I am not greatest fan of the corporation) to sue the shit out of Apple..this is one of the biggest company on tech market. They should be able to do better or employ a human to supervise what goes out. They should be able to afford it.
every "progressive" tech person who was all about "the resistance" to trump and fake news in 2016 is now happily welcoming trump's second term and the death of coherence and truth in media. if shareholders can squeeze an extra penny out of the quarter, that's all that matters
I now can’t decide if two people currently agree with the notion that 22 people agreed it could lead to court action, or if they agree that 22 people were just amused by the text in the image.
PLEASE DO NOT LIKE THIS POST OR MY HEAD WILL HURT.
I now can’t decide if one person (deep breath) agrees that two people agreed that 22 people agreed it could lead to court action OR if this one person agrees that two people agreed that 22 people were just amused by the text in the image.
People argue about wrong summaries, but don't ask the main question:
Why is Apple reading our PRIVATE messages?
Furthermore, why is Apple sending our PRIVATE messages into their cloud datacenters to be analyzed and summarized by an AI high on binary LSD?
Shouldn't happen -- since Apple Intelligence is done locally, on device. So if it's getting mixed up, it'll at least be on your messages rather than anyone elses (in theory)
It's not just inaccuracies that are a problem here. Headline writing is an art that balances salesmanship with responsibile tone and nuance. You can't just slap on your bad AI and think it'll all be fine.
It seems similar to the initial Apple Maps release; a rushed launch to compete with established competitors. I believe it ultimately turned out alright, though I've never personally used it. - for example
Excellent questions! I doubt that consumers are clamoring for AI summaries. Apple probably just wants to avoid having to pay humans to summarize the headlines.
I do think we get wayyyy too many push notifications these days. Apple should be forcing companies to let us opt IN to non-transactional notifications, but instead they’re just going to summarize them incorrectly.
I’m glad the article includes examples of Google’s “AI Overview” which is laughably bad. The day the AI told me that James Dickey’s poem “Falling” was written in 1992 but published in 1967, a friend screencapped a reply to “what replaces pork in stuffing for kosher diners” with “bacon or pancetta.”
The “Falling” error is an example of AI’s absence of actual intelligence. The text of Dickey’s poem, on the Poetry Foundation site, is pulled from a 1992 edition of his work. But I read the poem when I was 8, in a February 1967 issue of the New Yorker. AI regurgitates, it doesn’t analyze.
It's not just Apple, it's all "AI". The BBC, and any other news org, should 100% complain (at the very least, they should also be preparing to sue) to any "AI" company that misrepresents their reporting.
Interests me most to try and understand the logic behind how the AI summary came from the copy it reviewed. The illogical end result from a seemingly logic based system!? Where is the point of failure in the setup & prompts?
The current forms of AI will always make occasional errors. They don't understand what they are writing or saying. They're simply producing one of a set of the highest probability responses to the input given their training data and learning algorithm. Highest probability does not equal truth.
The future forms will also always make occasional errors, because of the foundation it's built on, as you mentioned. Always need to keep a human in the loop.
Given the BBC have adopted the use of clickbait headlines like the rest of the right wing media, I don’t think they have much grounds for complaint…🤷♂️
What's really crazy is the implication that ppl are being bombarded by SO much News™ on the regular that Apple thought it necessary to push a (crappy) feature which provides a (crappy) summary of what is already a summary (news notifications). Things be Happening.
the fact the app logos and titles are right there is surely the killer. If it was an Apple AI logo it might be different but any user would surely conclude the words were written by those outlets!
Execs/companies after launching a product they do. not. understand.: Hey, Apple, how can you do this to us!?
Sorry, but you launched a tool before understanding its limitations. That's on you. Senior jobs should be lost for this but you know they won't be. Bonuses will still be paid.
Comments
This is all any of us need to understand.
The only thing that matters in America is money.
E pluribus unum?
Nah.
Profits uber alles.
(This example though is quite funny)
PLEASE DO NOT LIKE THIS POST OR MY HEAD WILL HURT.
I now can’t decide if one person (deep breath) agrees that two people agreed that 22 people agreed it could lead to court action OR if this one person agrees that two people agreed that 22 people were just amused by the text in the image.
ARE YOU HAPPY NOW?
I now can’t decide if seven people now agree that one perso-
< A shot rings out from a grassy knoll. A puff of grey smoke rises skywards. A man puts down his umbrella>
Why is Apple reading our PRIVATE messages?
Furthermore, why is Apple sending our PRIVATE messages into their cloud datacenters to be analyzed and summarized by an AI high on binary LSD?
Senators getting random soccer mom summaries and vice versa.
It's all the same AI, reading everyone's messages.
Did you order from Schrödinger's?
Honestly though, this is worse than useless. Useless would be not getting information at all- this is actively misinforming 😮💨
AI: "Hold my beer"
…and ChatGBT. 🫦🫦🫦🫦🫦🫦🫦
@davidgerard.co.uk has explained why LLMs do this over and over if anyone spruiking this stuff wants to actually listen for a change.
https://pivot-to-ai.com/2024/09/04/dont-use-ai-to-summarize-documents-its-worse-than-humans-in-every-way/
Sorry, but you launched a tool before understanding its limitations. That's on you. Senior jobs should be lost for this but you know they won't be. Bonuses will still be paid.
thanks for listening.
kind regards,
bbc news