Recently, I saw a post on Lemmy of an article that piqued my interest, at least enough to try to validate the information in it. When I followed the link, I was greeted with a clearly AI generated image (it showed trump with an extra finger).
I immediately lost trust in the article and made a comment regarding that. (Link)
But the reaction to this was surprising to me. I got a response stating that the author has a background of being an established writer and reporter, as well as received a lot of downvotes. However, no one responded to my points on the use of AI.
My thoughts are that if you are making money on something, then you need to avoid AI when possible and reasonable.
What’s going on here? Am I wrong and this is somehow an acceptable use of AI?
[Edit] side note of something that that just occurred to me: don’t go to that thread to manipulate the votes or start ““brigading”” against it for the AI. I just wanted to discuss it here. Thanks.
I think the chances that Greg Palast is using generative AI to write his articles for him are extremely low.
Might be, but any use of generative “AI” shows such poor judgement that the image alone makes his text look dubious by association.
That was my entire point in response to the comment I got in response. Though, you expressed it much gooder than me did.
Didn’t mean to upstage you 🙂
nevertheless, i’m against generative AI, i don’t want any of this slop to be served to me. if you can’t afford paying an artist or license something valuable to illustrate your article, leave it.