News

35749 readers

2699 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.

Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.

7. No duplicate posts.

If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.

9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.

All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.

10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

JonsJava@lemmy.world

gedaliyah@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world

Meet Jonathan Ross' Wife, Patrixia, and Her Reaction to Renee Good's Shooting (www.ibtimes.co.uk)

submitted 4 weeks ago by homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

30 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Patrixia Ross, 38, brings a distinguished family background to her life in America. She is a naturalised United States citizen originally from the Philippines, and reports indicate she was raised in an environment of high professional achievement, as both of her parents were respected doctors in her home country.

That upbringing in the medical field suggests a life of relative privilege and education before she moved to the United States and married the federal agent. Neighbours in their Minnesota community described her as a dedicated mother who was deeply involved in raising their children.

She appears to enjoy cooking, having previously shared photos of baking recipes from a Spanish-language cookbook on social media. In July 2013, she also posted a snap of herself next to a US Border Patrol helicopter, when the couple was living around El Paso, Texas, according to the Daily Mail.

Neighbours told the outlet that Patrixia is 'polite, very nice, [and] very outgoing', a stark contrast to her 'very reserved' husband. The couple reportedly shares 'a couple of kids', and despite the intense scrutiny currently facing her husband, Patrixia has no personal history of legal trouble or public controversy prior to the shooting.

Her status as a naturalised citizen, however, adds a layer of complexity to the narrative, given that her husband's career was dedicated to enforcing immigration laws.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] tropicaldingdong@piefed.world 1 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

I've never seen a modern AI be challenged by those issues. And I'm not suggesting a human editor(s) wasn't involved.

But there is something about the sentence structure, framing, and tone. It doesn't read human to me. It reads like someone pushed a big list of stuff they found out through and AI to summarize and write an article with a specifically neutral tone.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 2 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Specifically this line:

Neighbours told the outlet that Patrixia is 'polite, very nice, [and] very outgoing', a stark contrast to her 'very reserved' husband.

You think the AI took the comment, interpreted it as needing an “and” for - reasons - then knew to bracket it because it was part of the quote? That seems like a lot of work for essentially nothing. But maybe.

[–] RaskolnikovsAxe@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

I think you may misunderstand how AI works. In fact your example suggests that AI did write the article.

The original text in the Daily Mail is

'The wife is polite, very nice, very outgoing, while he's very reserved. They have a couple of kids.'

This is a very human way to speak - not adding in the 'and' because it's not needed, and is actually clunky - and the human reporter recorded it in that way.

It was the AI that took that quote and added the '[and]' because that is the grammatically correct expectation - that is, it's the most likely way that sentence would be written in English, and it is trained on written text - even if it's not the human way to speak.

A human would not add the 'and' because it's not needed.

Plus there are dozens of other examples of AI phrasing in the article.