This is a Artificial Intelligence based Fictional Nightmare and a must Read. This also lays guidelines for any such AI system for news reporting, Esp. for Robotics based News Readers.
Hope it never comes true and remains fiction ! But beware — As Artificial Intelligence and Robotics is growing too fast. Consider the following robotic news readers– reporter A is an AI based robot and Reporter B is an AI based Robot–Both reading news on tv–guided by AI and signals.
In this article news reporters mean AI based robotic news reporters based on AI. This article presents the guidelines for an AI robotic news readers which matches the expectations from a human news reporter. Read news report below as robotic news reporter.
Do news reporter you have right to make decision for common people–thinking’s -who don’t do much complex understanding things ? And their brains are fed the thoughts the reporter want them to think ? Motivated by vested interests or AI ?
A fragment from this fictional instance. May be you can relate it to your life—I don’t know--But do read this fictional insight——
Let me introduce this fictional country is Country C and have two major parties to rule elections–Party A and Party B
The following are test cases for the robot to learn for better news anchoring and welfare of public. And the following also shows the signs to detect hacking of the news reporting AI Robots by a rival country.
Person X of Party A being drilled— by Repoter_A and Reporter_B for verifying word said today. BTW anyone can miss words–when even these fictional reporters can —
Two reporters Reporter_A and Reporter _B trying to do fact check–
Reporter _A saying— The person X claimed this and this
Reporter _B, The Other said— This was verified, he didn’t called there. Person X assistant said that the context of his talk was something else. Then Reporter _B came to same points—I also verified that it was just a call not a visit. Hence this is a false things. Person X was lying.
Hold On !! Wait!!
People watching news shows are not watching a entertainment channel.
We need facts——and raw facts–not your conclusions made by your naïve decisions.
The facts were
Person X talked to Person Y, and person W on phone. Person X secretary, told it was all about something else. To the best of the knowledge the Reporter can accumulate in the given time frame—Don’t forget to add these lines.
We can conclude on our own——-NOT—what you want us to think. We have brains and we can think on our own where our understanding lands us
You don’t need to conclude to us that–——- Person X said a lie–hence a concluded well— This is irresponsible bombarding to innocent human brains–who rely on the this source of information———
We can conclude on our own—–that yes may be person X was talking of something else. Or may be some other context which a news reporter who is so young cannot even understand. What experience you had ? DO you have right to make decision for common people–thinkings -who don’t do much complex understanding things ?
What I concluded was– Yes there is some misunderstanding the reporter is in. May be she is too eager to make decisions against person X. Is she Party B supporter. But in the following you will see she is criticizing Party B as well. On whose saying such naïve comments on trusted sources?
INSTANCE 2 — Person Z of Party B being drilled
Now the same two reporters are drilling Person Z of Party B.
Same pattern it is
Reporter_A saying— The person Z claimed this and this
Reporter_B, The Other said— There are no ____ number of people at border trying to get inside country. Hence this is a false things.
I ask Reporter_B — do you know more than him ? If so why dont you stand in elections?
Secondly, did you try to understand what he was saying?– I say NO
So why did you conclude— —No Person Z is saying wrong?
He may have information you don’t know or may be he cant tell you that.
Hence—-Please dont try to influence minds of common people watching all this.
Who are you working for ? Country C or its rival ?
When you are criticizing both the parties a place can have Party_A leader was criticized and Party_B leader words were not even understood.
Do you have vested interests for someone out side Party A and Party B ? As for sure this is not a free and fair display of facts-–hence vested interests are involved–Facts evaluations involve showing contents and facts——-why you putting wrong words in brains of common people?
May be a rival of Country C — is behind it ? And in this fictional worst case a robotic reporter may have vested and personal interest in welfare of the rival country–or robots are hacked by rival country——
If for their own people——-then show just facts
we dont want conclusions–from non elected or non leaders!
We want people to use their brains to conclude things on their own.
Don’t give false words to common people brains, making them think –as if all is there are so many problems ! This is the best ambition a rival country of Country C can have !
This is the conclusion of the article—
The news reporting robots are hacked by rival country and need to be send to workshop.
These measures and steps to be followed by any AI agent delivering news article–be she be a robot or a humanoid robot–guided by a foreign satellite through signals. And these conversations above can test if Robotic News Reader is Hacked by a Rival or Not !
This is the future of AI and we have to take care of such robots as a moral responsibility ~~