 |
|
| node: | 23.05.2025-16:41:16 |
| template: | 4 |
| parent: | Zaujímavosti |
| owner: | drakh |
| viewed by: | |
| created: | 23.05.2025 - 16:41:16 |
|
cwbe coordinatez: 101 63539 4879893 9244570 ABSOLUT KYBERIA |
| permissions | |
| you: | r, |
| system: | public |
| net: | yes |
total descendants::0
total children::0
https://www.science.org/content/article/unethical-ai-research-reddit-under-fire
A study that used artificial intelligence–generated content to “participate” in online discussions and test whether AI was more successful at changing people’s minds than human-generated content has caused an uproar because of ethical concerns about the work.
In a brief summary of the research posted online—but subsequently removed—the researchers report that the AI content was significantly more persuasive than human-generated content, receiving more “deltas”—awarded for a strong argument that resulted in changed beliefs—per comment than other accounts. The comments personalized with inferred user information performed best, in the 99th percentile of all commenters within the subreddit.
In a brief summary of the research posted online—but subsequently removed—the researchers report that the AI content was significantly more persuasive than human-generated content, receiving more “deltas”—awarded for a strong argument that resulted in changed beliefs—per comment than other accounts. The comments personalized with inferred user information performed best, in the 99th percentile of all commenters within the subreddit.
A study that used artificial intelligence–generated content to “participate” in online discussions and test whether AI was more successful at changing people’s minds than human-generated content has caused an uproar because of ethical concerns about the work.
In a brief summary of the research posted online—but subsequently removed—the researchers report that the AI content was significantly more persuasive than human-generated content, receiving more “deltas”—awarded for a strong argument that resulted in changed beliefs—per comment than other accounts. The comments personalized with inferred user information performed best, in the 99th percentile of all commenters within the subreddit.
In a brief summary of the research posted online—but subsequently removed—the researchers report that the AI content was significantly more persuasive than human-generated content, receiving more “deltas”—awarded for a strong argument that resulted in changed beliefs—per comment than other accounts. The comments personalized with inferred user information performed best, in the 99th percentile of all commenters within the subreddit.