• Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 hours ago

    Is there a term for “lying by imprecise wording likely to be interpreted in a more serious way that what is actually the supportable message”? Because this headline is such a prime example.

    When you read this it sounds like Grok fired missiles in some way. But the actually supportable message is that it was used in target selection, and its speed enabled the missile attack to reach such a scale in a short time frame.

    Edit: Not that I think that’s good or anything, don’t get me wrong. I’m just railing against the shoddy journalism, despite the horrifying content.

    • LotrOrc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      43 minutes ago

      No it really doesnt. It reads as though they used Grok in the shooting of 2000 missiles. If you thought they just gave Grok control of the missiles and Grok went off like a 10 year old on Call of Duty then idk what to say.

      I would say this is just as bad as Grok having actual control though, as I doubt these fools in charge double checked anything Grok put out about targets, hence the killing of 168 school girls on the first day.

      But for months they’ve been reporting theyre using AI to choose targets im not sure why this would be any different.