The Intercept conservative?! The Nation conservative?! What gives?

  • vhstape@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Just because you don’t like the top result doesn’t mean it is irrelevant EDIT: I am in fact an asshole. I see the problem now 😂

    • hedge@beehaw.orgOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m on Fennec, searching DuckDuck from the address bar. Here’s another one:

      • Steal Wool@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Weird I just searched and got totally different text, can’t upload the screens screenshot tho

        A Current Affairs subscription is one of the best known ways to improve your life in a hurry. Our print magazine is released six times a year, in a beautiful full-color edition full of elegant design, sophisticated prose, and satirical advertisements. Tell me more How Anti-Homeless Sentiment Made Its Way Into Popular Cartoons Alex Skopic

        The Dangerous Populist Science of Yuval Noah

  • DonnieDarkmode@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yeah where are those descriptions coming from? Also mentions “the strike workers’ strike” and repeats “politics” twice

    • floofloof@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      44
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Seems like a poorly trained ML model - crudely speaking, perhaps its training set was tilted towards descriptions of conservative news sites so it learned to insert the word “conservative” when describing a news site.

      • tuckerm@supermeter.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        29
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t want to jump to conclusions, but that does sound like a very possible explanation.

        Poo. I was hoping DDG would keep LLM-generated summaries out of their UI.

        • nyan@lemmy.cafe
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          ·
          1 year ago

          My guess is that they’re surfacing something from Bing rather than doing this themselves. Still Not Good, though.

    • radix@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      That makes it sound like an outdated LLM, like GPT-2 or something. You think it is?

        • upstream@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          “Smart WordPress sites”, now that’s an oxymoron!

          But do please tell how you figure out if a plugin will be caught having a vulnerability or not.

            • upstream@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              The fact that you can audit it has zero value.

              People don’t audit anything, and pretending that they do is hopeful at best, deceitful at worst.

              Even if you audit it you are likely not understanding the code well enough to figure out if it is vulnerable.

              Which leads back to my original point which thus still stands; there’s no smart way to choose non-vulnerable plugins. One can obviously avoid things that don’t meet certain standards (popularity, lines of code, known issues, how they’re resolved, etc.), but still doesn’t guarantee anything.

              This means that your statement about “smart Wordpress sites don’t pick vulnerable plugins” is frivolous. May I suggest “smart Wordpress sites chooses plugins carefully and limits the amount to those strictly necessary, but should still pay attention to updates patching issues”. Because that’s the difference between smart and dumb. Dumb sites are just left running whatever they shipped with, PHP or not, and smart devs make sure to keep their system and/or CMS and plugins up date.

              And if you still want to argue that people actually review the code they depend upon I have one word for you: Heartbleed.

  • tuckerm@supermeter.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    It showed me the same thing, but after searching again a few times I’m now seeing a summary of the articles on their homepages.

    Side note: I’ve had a weird bug a few times with DDG lately, where it showed me results for current events that were completely unrelated to what I was looking for. I searched for something like “10 inch chef’s knife” but the results were as though I had typed “US house of representatives speaker.” This has happened maybe three or four times in the last two weeks.

  • KinNectar@kbin.run
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    @hedge because they aren’t using the political compass. Two or three political dimensions with only two words describing them leads to meaningless labeling.

    • hedge@beehaw.orgOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      That would explain it! I think I remember seeing Jacobin as being the same degree of liberal as The Atlantic, and there’s no way that could be right! Oops, I mean “correct.” 🙄