I’ve avoided using AI features in Firefox. If I want AI, I explicitly go to AI rather than having it integrated. But you offer some good use cases. And fundamentally I agree that 100% fact checking with a 90% accuracy rate is better than the 0% fact checking most of us do except when we think something is wrong and we go digging through for arguments against it.

That being said, I would worry about model makers building in inherent bias. Like I could never trust Grok as the engine behind a fact checker (though it is surprisingly resilient and often calls out bullshit it is supposed to be peddling).

Like imagine the person who only wants OANGPT to summarize or fact check every article they read. Can you imagine the level of self-delusion that would come from a MAGA-fied version of everything they read? It would be like living in a propaganda factory. Deliberately.

Facebook: Bob Smith [woke, probably drinks soy milk and dresses as a woman on weekends]: Had a great day at work today. [he’s probably on welfare so this is bullshit] Big things are coming! [He’s part of a trans pedo ring, guaranteed!]

Which feels like stupid hyperbole, but I’ll bet every one of us knows at least one person who is that stupid.

Eh. I use AI all the time, but my level of skepticism…

I only use it for unimportant things.

The key to responsible AI use. Of course, in the grand scheme, few things are all that important.

If the marginal cost of being wrong about something is essentially zero, AI is a very helpful resource due to its speed and ubiquity.

I mean 4 out of 5 Americans probably held the opinion:

I wasn’t thinking about it that way but you have a good point.

My point is ultimately that activism (or being trans) isn’t illegal, so what is the activity being reported to the justice department? It’s not the department of “things that bother me personally,” it’s department that handles violations of law. But no laws are being violated.

It seems like a weird ask.

Wait, what is the legal definition of an activist and in what way is that a violation of law?

This is the problem with reporting internet shit as if it were news. If you don’t have a name and face to put with the words, you have no idea who is saying what.