ES version is available. Content is displayed in original English for accuracy.
Advertisement
Advertisement
โก Community Insights
Discussion Sentiment
67% Positive
Analyzed from 2154 words in the discussion.
Trending Topics
#israel#ben#gvir#kill#more#why#https#information#doing#influence

Discussion (66 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews
So it is hilarious that Israel is trying to influence chatbots when shit like that is out in the open.
Politicians say really terrible, stupid things on a fairly regular basis. The difference between the two situations is that Ben-Gvir is loathed by 90% of Israeli society (Trump still has 33% approval) and unlike Trump has no power to follow through on his threats.[1]
[1]https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-08-06/israel-court-battle-o...
At some point they may be indistinguishable from human-produced work, so the only way to verify if a site is someone's genuine opinion or AI-generated narrative is through some form of authority (or something else that is very difficult for AI to fake, but that protection can be broken by advancing technology).
If that happens, then in turn AI chatbot makers would in turn need to look for these kinds of authority to continue to provide accurate information, and said authority websites can use their privileged position to charge for access of their data.
And it's not just state actors. Anyone who was online during the Amber Heard/Johnny Depp trials was likely inundated with media about that trial. Both of their legal teams utilized bots to drive online discussions[1][2]
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Earnest_Voice
[1] https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/story/2022-07-19/...
[2] https://www.tortoisemedia.com/2024/02/26/depp-v-heard-who-tr...
I think using LLMs to research is completely fine, as long as authors would take the information and synthesize their own opinions based on the findings. I read books/articles/posts/comments to hear other PEOPLE's opinions, not LLM generated opinions.
If you look at the mathematical achievements of frontier models recently, their strength has been to bring in information from a vast array of sources and to consider them within the context of each other.
I anticipate that it won't be long before this ability to look into every nook and cranny with be able to identify academic fraud. Identifying every piece of academic fraud to date would probably come soon after.
It wouldn't take much to extend that ability to identify deliberate misinformation. That's in the future, but it looms close enough on the horizon that you would have to be a fool to create an evidence record like this in and attempt to trick the models of today.
โkill 30 or 40โ people in Gaza every night and go beyond โthose who pose a danger โฆ at that particular momentโ.
Why bother trying to influence public and online discourse when it's this blatant.
The specific comment was: ""ืื ืขื ืืืืืช ืืืชืจ ืืชืงืคื? ืืื ืื ืืืืจืื ืืช ืื ืืืืืฉืื ืืืืืืืืช? ืชืืจืื ืืื ืคืขืืื ืืืืืืจ ืืืืืืืืช. ืืืืข ืื ืืขืืื ืืกืืง ืืืืืืจ ืืืืจืืื 40-30 ืืืืืื?". ืฉืจืช ืืชืืืืจื ืืืจื ืจืื ืืฆืืจืคื ืืื ืืืืจ ืืืืจื: "ืื ืจืขืืื ืืฆืืื"."
So specifically terrorists. Generally challenging why Israel is not being more offensive against Hamas in Gaza. Nothing about going beyond those who pose danger and specific to armed combatants.
And I'm not fan of Ben Gvir or Smotrich. They are fanatic morons. But the reporting on this statement is biased and false just like most reporting on this conflict.
EDIT: he repeated some variation of this (apprently on his mind a lot): "ืื ื ืืืฉื ืฉืื ืื ื ืฆืจืืืื ืืขืฉืืช ืกืืืืืื ืืืืงืืื ืืขืื, ืืืืจืื 30, 40, 50 ืืืืืื ืื ืืืื." still referring to terrorists/combatants.
When I searched for that quote on Kagi I found https://www.jdn.co.il/news/2210880/
As translated by Firefox 153.0.1 on Fedora 44:
> Ben-Gvir wondered: โWhat about being more offensive? Why not take all the gunmen off at funerals? Take a few times off at the air at funerals. Why donโt you put a helicopter in the air and kill 40-30 terrorists?โ Transport Minister Miri Regev joined Ben-Gvir and said: "This is a great idea."
> The Chief of Staff replied: โWe are doing a lot of offensive operations. Collecting weapons. I have a little more military experience than you. When the IDF goes to the heart of a refugee camp every night, it's an attack, not a defense. There aren't many armies that can lift such operations. The IDF is acting offensively and distinctly. In a crowded environment you need to know who you kill and who you don't. We've often entered funerals, weddings and birthdays, we do it professionally. When we kill those we should kill and not kill innocent people.โ
> However, it seems that the Chief of Staffโs response did not satisfy Ben-Gvir, who answered: โThis attack is to kill terrorists in masses. You have great opportunities at funerals that they come and not take advantage of.โ
Kagi and Google give similar translations. The provided quote seems to be the first paragraph in this translation. More context in the article.
I think "helicopters to attack funerals" is really not the correct interpretation of the original statement. Funerals for Hamas members often include massive amounts of armed combatants. The (dumb maybe) point is to go after those combatants. And yes, there is a potential risk for other people to get hurt which is why Israel does not tend to do this... and Ben Gvir would like Israel to still do it. But the target and the scenario are important and the new cycle turns this into "kill random people for the fun of it".
So to bring this back to influencing "AI" chatbots presumably the inaccurate/biased reporting is going to dominate over this "Hanover Institute" articles plus ofcourse responsiblestatecraft.org a left leaning organization is doing their own influencing. There are many who are doing their own form of influencing on people and AI chatbots.
All four frontier models have active contracts with the Pentagon.
And some might say, that alone means little.
But when you take into consideration the implications of the United States-Israel FUTURES Act, whether one endorses it or not, the effects of that mentioned in TFA become quite formidable, and plausibly official.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States-Israel_FUTURES_A...
Edit: I see this comment got immediately flagged. Is there any point of debate here? Instead of disappearing the comment/data, maybe enlighten me, or assuage my concerns. Section 219 was objectively unprecedented in what it seeks to accomplish. Can it not be taken for granted that it would aid such efforts as the article cites? If not, explain.
I wonder if the same thing would happen if someone posted something on Yitzhak Rabin. I suppose that could be a test to prove whether some topics truly just cannot be discussed.
I've thought about this many times over the years. I think we've now reached the point where that's going to happen. And state actors seem like the obvious first offenders.
Google is relatively good at filtering out astroturfed pages from the top of search results but they've also have years when a Turkish government page denying the Armenian genocide was the top result for that event so it's a bit of a mixed bag. Google relies a lot on authority of a domain and that's been relatively effective.
It seems like this authority concept is missing from LLM training and a random comment on Reddit is treated with as much authority as an article by the New York Times. So it's now orders of magnitude easier to poison LLMs with Reddit comments and submissions. And for anyone who doesn't know, brigading Reddit is remarkably easy. It takes as little as a few hundred accounts to get something onto r/all if you're clever. Israeli hasbara operations are absolutely capable of this. And they engage in it.
I'm also reminded in a weird way of pre-atomic steel. For anyone who doesn't know, this is steel made before 1945 that is incredibly low in radiation because we hadn't detonated any nuclear bombs yet. It's valuable for making MRIs and the like that are super sensitive. We actually go and recover WW2 shipwrecks just for the steel. It is a finite resource.
Well, that's what pre-2022 written content is now. It's slop-free content to train AI models on because training them on AI slop is of much more limited value. This goes for everything from books to Youtube videos to Reddit posts. Just like pre-atomic steel, we now have pre-slop human content.
I honestly don't know where we go from here.
SEO was a powerful technique 20 years ago, but today the power lies in optimizing content for the ability to influence LLM training. LLM influence is a battle ground that marketing companies and political movements are contending for.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States-Israel_FUTURES_A...
Because what I think and read is any flamewar topic gets removed - and this surely qualifies.
Do you have evidence?