this post was submitted on 02 Mar 2024
706 points (98.8% liked)

Technology

59671 readers
3936 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

In the wave of AI controversies and lawsuits, CNET has been publicly admonished since it first started posting thinly-veiled AI-generated content on its site in late 2022— a scandal that has culminated in the site being demoted from Trusted to Untrusted Sources on Wikipedia.

Considering that CNET has been in the business since 1994 and maintained a top-tier reputation on Wikipedia up until late 2020, this change came after lots of debate between Wikipedia's editors and has drawn the attention of many in the media, including some CNET staff members.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Evilcoleslaw 137 points 8 months ago (4 children)

With whom did CNET maintain a top tier reputation until 2020? It's been a shell of itself for well over a decade at this point. That they've gone to full throated AI content seems to me the corpse standing up and shuffling around as a zombie.

[–] kescusay 41 points 8 months ago

They were still doing some decent journalism here and there, but yeah, it's been getting worse and worse very steadily.

[–] NewNewAccount 12 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Been going downhill since the death of James Kim in 2006.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago

Yeah, if it was a "reputable source" ten years ago someone dropped the ball.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 122 points 8 months ago (1 children)

CNET lost my trust when they repacked software and drivers in their archive with a homebrew installer that bundled bloatware. Initially the bing search bar, then Opera, latest I remember was some antivirus solution. Sure, you can deselect them all, but I hate those business practices with a passion.

[–] pdxfed 5 points 8 months ago

Yeah, I mean prior to 2000 they were one of the trusted sources for software to be easily accessed and downloaded that was the up to date version. I would often learn about new features when installing what I downloaded from them because every piece of software didn't have embedded auto update and publishers were often small and given the developing state of things, unknown.

[–] [email protected] 104 points 8 months ago (24 children)

I like it that Wikipedia is now an authority on trustworthy citation sources.

[–] EddieTee77 38 points 8 months ago

Somebody needs to be! I like it being them

[–] Bonesince1997 23 points 8 months ago (2 children)

I hope people are donating to them from time to time.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (22 replies)
[–] anon987 82 points 8 months ago (4 children)

Tom's hardware should be blacklisted. After it was purchased by a company that has a partnership with Intel, the bias and corporate propaganda is terrible.

[–] TheControlled 59 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Ohhhh that's why they have such a boner for Team Blue all the time. You just solved a mystery for me.

A little while ago I read part of a review where the author goes on and on about this latest and greatest AMD processor and how shit it was because it was way too powerful and really you should just buy a Intel CPU that is way slower and just as expensive, if not more so. Because you don't really need that much power do you? Or more money in your pocket? Give poor little indie developer Intel a try. I couldn't continue reading.

I was flabbergasted, yet impressed by the audacity of such a claim that has zero reasonable logic. Now it all makes sense.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 8 months ago (4 children)

They must have hired the clown that runs UserBemchark.

[–] TheControlled 5 points 8 months ago

Lol I found the review through there, holy shit

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 22 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Future's portfolio of brands included TechRadar, PC Gamer, Tom's Guide, Tom's Hardware, Marie Claire, GamesRadar+, All About Space, How it Works, CinemaBlend, Android Central, IT Pro and Windows Central.

-Wikipedia

[–] TheFonz 11 points 8 months ago

Hate CinemaBlend. Just endless vapid Ai generated shit. Probably the same course for the rest.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Oh that explains a bit. Who's decent these days?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] galil3o 7 points 8 months ago

I deleted their bookmark when that story about the KFC gaming console was plastered on the front page for days

[–] PrincessLeiasCat 52 points 8 months ago (2 children)

My friend used to work for CNET. She was laid off along with a decent amount of her coworkers years ago, maybe as much as 10+ IIRC, but yeah - they’ve been going downhill for awhile now and it seems to only be accelerating.

It’s really a shame because they used to be such a trusted source. Enshittification marches on to a steady beat.

[–] ripcord 11 points 8 months ago

That's not enshittification. It's just getting shittier.

[–] pete_the_cat 7 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Cats were working at CNET?

[–] T156 10 points 8 months ago (1 children)

It is possible for cats to have non-cat friends.

[–] baatliwala 6 points 8 months ago

The politically correct term for those in the cat world is "servant" or "slave".

[–] [email protected] 44 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I have not consciously clicked on any CNET content since the early 2000s. In my mind their content are mostly puff pieces without much substance. Are they even still relevant?

[–] TheControlled 12 points 8 months ago

Google doesn't promote their pages until the middle or bottom of the search page which may as well be in the Mariana's trench. That's my anecdotal experience, anyway.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 8 months ago (1 children)

CNET has been garbage for well over a decade- as bad as AI is, that’s not the reason they went to shit.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 26 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

So they went from dumbshit to dogshit.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 8 months ago

Wow. You know you dun goofed it when the "online encyclopedia anyone can edit" makes it very clear that "but not to write about you".

[–] [email protected] 16 points 8 months ago (3 children)

But wait, isn't AI the future?

[–] [email protected] 14 points 8 months ago

Yes, just like the blockchain

[–] [email protected] 11 points 8 months ago

The AI thinks so.

[–] TheControlled 4 points 8 months ago

Always has been.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Shame. I remember when they were one of my favorite tech sites.

[–] EddieTee77 6 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Me too! The problem is that we are running out of good tech sites. They're all getting bought and turning into SEO spam

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

In recent months, 404media has been popular among lemmings. I think those articles were ok. Maybe they could fill the void left by cnet.

[–] NutWrench 5 points 8 months ago

Good for Wikipedia. A lot of "AI generated" content is simply plagiarized from existing sources.

[–] cabron_offsets 5 points 8 months ago

CNET has been shit since the late 90s.

load more comments
view more: next ›