Comment by hypfer
2 hours ago
Not to dunk on your friends and all, but wasn't Buzzfeed the exact outlet at the forefront of dismantling the credibility of the word "journalism"?
Like.. they surely had valid pieces, but I remember them also being the ones smashing the system and trust to pieces by being very social-media-engagement-native (for the lack of a better term).
__
The LLM as this beautiful straight man default human simulator tells me that BuzzFeed News was some kind of investigative journalism daughter company of Buzzfeed the destroyer of worlds, and with that these would for sure be two unconnected entities, not to be judged like that.
And, for all legal intents and purposes, I am of course sure it is completely right. I could almost bet that this exact trick is why there even was a legit journalism daughter company with the same name in the first place.
So that one could well-actually all the bad words away, by pointing at it and either saying "Hey it's a different thing!!!111" or "Hey but we're also doing good work in that branch!!!!1111". Always depending on which is more opportune. Association or disassociation.
__
Anyway. I do believe you that your friends were trying to do the right thing.
I just have doubts as to why the place they were in even existed in the first place.
Certainly to enable them to do great journalistic work, but maybe not because the corporate superstructure actually cared by heart about great journalistic work.
At least I do not see it around no more, which might indicate that it outlived its corporate usefulness as a moral shield.
They really were separate. BuzzFeed News won a Pulitzer in 2021 (source: Wikipedia). It's unfortunate that they shared the same name.
[flagged]
It's wild to watch you lecture someone who just made you aware of the topic that you are lecturing him about.
I conclude from this comment that the LLM's reader simulation was accurate in that reading "LLM told me that" would instantly make people bail out with "Ha you have no idea" thing.
Could've reworded that to not trigger this response, but then it would not have been accurate to my workflow, which is a higher goal in this case.
As it is now, it reflects the exact path of thinking that happened. Could've retconned that through the edit feature of course. There are no restrictions to that. But then it would be more "convincing" but less true to reality.
__
Beside that, neither "lecture someone" nor "who just made you aware of the topic that you are lecturing him about" is accurate, but it is accurate enough (storytelling and all) to again let the LLM run with it.