this post was submitted on 10 Aug 2023
76 points (87.3% liked)

Technology

59414 readers
2846 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. 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
[–] lily33@lemm.ee 21 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Is that effect any different than the one you'd get if you have biased references, or biased search results, when doing the researchb for your writing?

[–] Mardukas@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Well of course it will be different. One has to do with another author publishing questionable data and the other would be related to misunderstanding of someone else's published data. In this case, the use of AI in writing is implied to result in authors not being in control of what they themselves publish.

All of these are bad but do not necessarily arise on purpose. But let's not add ways to muddy the already mudied waters of science.

[–] Elephant0991@lemmy.bleh.au 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Those seem like questions for more research.

I bet it's more pernicious because it is easy to incorporate AI suggestions. If you do your own research, you may have to think a bit if the references/search results may be bad, and you still have to put the info in your own words so that you don't offend the copyright gods. With the AI help, well, the spellings are good, the sentences are perfectly formed, the information is plausible, it's probably not a straight-forward copy, why not just accept?

[–] lily33@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

I've just read the abstract of the study - but it doesn't seem to be about people mindlessly copying the AI and producing biased text as a result. Rather, it's about people seeing the points the AI makes, thinking "Good point!" and adjusting their own opinion accordingly.

So it looks to me like it's just the effect of where done view points get more exposure.