← Back to context

Comment by giov4

2 hours ago

comparing and mentioned SEO or other stuff here is clearly a tentative of misinformation and confusion of readers.

the claim "the author just made up his own framing entirely" is clearly an unbased accusation.

The article clearly explain the information poisoning, fast paced publication and ties to government, nothing else.

this comment should be flagged as is misleading users off topic.

stop polluting this thread in an organized and selfish self supporting way. so typical

>a tentative of misinformation

What does this mean?

> is clearly an unbased accusation.

"Israel creates fake think tank" is the headline. What is a "think tank"? What distinguishes a real one from a fake one? Does "the Hanover Institute" claim to be a think tank?

The author does not answer any of these questions, only saying "At a glance, the Hanover Institute for Public Policy looks like a new think tank dedicated to Israel/Palestine": in other words, he glanced at it, decided it looked like a think tank, then decided it wasn't a "real" one, and then went from there. That is very much the author's framing instead of something grounded in objectivity.

>The article clearly explain the information poisoning

The article says "Others refer to this practice of influencing artificial intelligence as 'LLM poisoning.'"

But the Anthropic paper that it cites to support this claim never discusses persuasive content, propaganda, or credibility-mimicking material at all; it uses "poisoning" for a technically distinct attack class. So the citation doesn't support the claim as written.

>stop polluting this thread in an organized and selfish self supporting way. so typical

What do you mean by this? How am I organized? Why is it selfish to criticize an article?