An AI agent was banned from editing Wikipedia pages... and that's when things got weird, with the agent publishing its complaints publicly.
  • Lvxferre [he/him]@mander.xyzEnglish
    19·
    2 months ago

    For moral and legal purposes, I think that actions of misbehaving bots should be assigned to the person managing those bots. So for example:

    • Bot starts vandalising Wikipedia with credible misinformation — ban every account of the person running the bot, including the one associated with the bot
    • Bot publishes a “hit piece” on someone (like the Shambaugh case) — defamation + libel charges against the person running the bot.

    You get the idea, right. People have been using automated tools to evade responsibility since forever; cue to the old Reddit “I did nothing lol automod did it lmao” mod excuse.

  • uuj8za@piefed.socialEnglish
    141·
    2 months ago

    Stupid click-bait headline. It makes it sound like Wikipedia has an AI agent, “Wikipedia’s AI agent”.

    Wikipedia’s AI agent row likely just the beginning of the bot-ocalypse

    Should be this:

    Wikipedia’s fight about AI agents likely just the beginning of the bot-ocalypse

    • emmanuel_car@fedia.io
      1·
      2 months ago

      I read it as

      Wikipedia’s row against AI agent(s) likely just the beginning of the bot-ocalypse

      I don’t think it’s clickbait, just more weird headline grammar