The reporter fucked up, and it was published so Ars Technica fucked up too, but fuck-ups happen. The far bigger fuck-up is that Ars Technica hasn't covered this story with a fraction of the tenacity they'd show if the fuck-ups had happened at, say, TechCrunch or Gizmodo.
Talking publicly about how and why you fired someone that used to work at your company is generally a no-no, for legal reasons if no other.
That one article undermined my ability to reasonably trust Ars Technica; however, I'm glad they are taking steps to remedy that breech of trust.
That same author did a January piece - "10 things I learned from ..." Then all of the things he adored about vibbing with AI for a month. It was clickbaity enough that it made it onto the news.google.com feed.
Ars has had lots of recent click bait phrasing in their articles, far more than a decade ago.
I've put the site on cool-down from my regular rotation.
I missed that one, I don't read Ars Technica enough to know this. Thank you for bringing it to my attention, as such an article would've belonged better on a techbro site, glazing LLMs that have yet to manifest the power that techbros claim it has.
They don't review articles before publishing them? What if Scott Shambaugh didn't comment? I can't trust Ars anymore
So... Journalists just push stories without an editor reviewing them? I always assumed publications like Ars had someone in the Gandalf role (you shall not pass!) making sure articles were "correct" in many ways. ... Guess not?
well that's nice i guess
"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"
A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.
AI, in this case, refers to LLMs, GPT technology, and anything listed as "AI" meant to increase market valuations.