This is straight out of Neal Stephenson’s novel Snow Crash. Sigh.

Ahh, yes - the studio that own Star Trek has turned against diversity, equity, and inclusivity. I foresee no repercussions from that at all. /s

I actually had that thought as well, and while they certainly might, I think they’re aiming more for the people who add “reddit” to a Google search when looking for answers.

Every time I see a story like this, I’m always pretty sure it’s an AI that was trained on Reddit content.

I don’t think anyone has been inviting her to the cookout for awhile…

Harris has talked repeatedly about her work taking down sex traffickers. Usually within the context of her work against transnational gangs.

“I went after transnational gangs, drug cartels and human traffickers that came into our country illegally. I prosecuted them in case after case,” she said at a campaign rally in Nevada

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/08/17/kamala-harris-immigration-border-gangs-00173819

But also within context of protecting sex workers.

In one of her first acts as an elected official, Harris sponsored a bill signed into law by Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger that increased penalties for adults who solicited sex from minors and was considered revolutionary for its push to transform children from criminals into victims.

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-09-26/before-combating-sex-trafficking-became-a-republican-tenet-kamala-harris-wrote-the-playbook

Wow, an RFK Jr apologist!

<crosses off on bingo card>

Since he went all in on antivax and conspiracy stuff, Dems have known he’s a weird/crazy dude. Which is a damn shame, as pre-brain worms, he was a kick-ass environmental lawyer. Dude is clearly not all there and hasn’t been for decades.

It’s not a question of “should” - an opinion piece is rhetoric, not reporting. You can fact check some of it sometimes but functionally can’t hold it to the same standards as a regular news article. I agree that this can sometimes lead to “alternative facts” and disingenuous arguments, but the only other option is to forbid the publication of them which is obviously an infringement of first amendment rights. It’s messy, and it can lead to people being misinformed, but it’s what we’re stuck with.

No problem. Specifically came to my attention about a week ago on this post where the bot reported on an opinion piece as if it was straight news.

BTW, I actually do appreciate the bot and think it’s doing about as well as it can given the technical limitations of the platform.

One problem I’ve noticed is that the bot doesn’t differentiate between news articles and opinion pieces. One of the most egregious examples is the NYT. Opinion pieces aren’t held to the same journalistic standards as news articles and shouldn’t be judged for bias and accuracy in the same way as news content.

I believe most major news organizations include the word “Opinion” in titles and URLs, so perhaps that could be something keyed off of to have the bot label these appropriately. I don’t expect you to judge the bias and accuracy of each opinion writer, but simply labeling them as “Opinion pieces are not required to meet accepted journalistic standards and bias is expected.” would go a long way.

Um, I never said it did. I said this doctor released the information to “own the libs” because he’s an asshat.

The worst part is that these weren’t even his patients - he just decided to share their private medical records to own the libs

No one seems to be reading the article - it was a survey of only 2,000 participants on a financial advice website. These folks have already made poor decisions and likely not experienced in managing their money. The usual FUD that the OP posts everywhere.