I understand. It was particularly galling to me that they doubled down on the report after the initial backlash on it. It came out after that that they hadn’t used the Ukranian teams to write it and had interviewed POWs in russian detention for source references which is inherently problematic for a couple of reasons.
This Wikipedia entry neatly summarizes a lot of the criticisms at the time and AI’s response which was weak, to say the least. Because of the incredibly tense nature of the active war in Ukraine and how this report would obviously be interpreted, plus the effective doubling-down AI chose to follow the report with - I just can’t with them anymore.
It’s a shame, I supported them for decades, but. They really fucked up.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !canada@lemmy.ca
https://www.reuters.com/world/head-ukraines-amnesty-office-leaves-after-group-accuses-kyiv-2022-08-06/
https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/amnesty-announces-review-as-ukraine-report-backlash-continues/
That second one is pretty clear. Thanks for the link. I’m not sure it justifies discounting them forever, but it’s good to keep in mind.
I understand. It was particularly galling to me that they doubled down on the report after the initial backlash on it. It came out after that that they hadn’t used the Ukranian teams to write it and had interviewed POWs in russian detention for source references which is inherently problematic for a couple of reasons.
This Wikipedia entry neatly summarizes a lot of the criticisms at the time and AI’s response which was weak, to say the least. Because of the incredibly tense nature of the active war in Ukraine and how this report would obviously be interpreted, plus the effective doubling-down AI chose to follow the report with - I just can’t with them anymore.
It’s a shame, I supported them for decades, but. They really fucked up.