Amazon's Alexa has been claiming the 2020 election was stolen

[ificandream]

Source: Washington Post

Amid concerns the rise of artificial intelligence will supercharge the spread of misinformation comes a wild fabrication from a more prosaic source: Amazon’s Alexa, which declared that the 2020 presidential election was stolen.

Asked about fraud in the race — in which President Biden defeated former president Donald Trump with 306 electoral college votes — the popular voice assistant said it was “stolen by a massive amount of election fraud,” citing Rumble, a video streaming service favored by conservatives.

The 2020 races were “notorious for many incidents of irregularities and indications pointing to electoral fraud taking place in major metro centers,” according to Alexa, referencing Substack, a subscription newsletter service. Alexa contended that Trump won Pennsylvania, citing “an Alexa answers contributor.”

Multiple investigations into the 2020 election have revealed no evidence of fraud, and Trump faces federal criminal charges connected to his efforts to overturn the election. Yet Alexa disseminates misinformation about the race, even as parent company Amazon promotes the tool as a reliable election news source to more than 70 million estimated users.

Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/10/07/amazon-alexa-news-2020-election-misinformation/

---

This is beyond wow.

[hlthe2b]

1. AMAZON must address this NOW... Complete with an honest appraisal of how this could have happened.

Full responsibility and a plan to immediately address it.

[oldsoftie]

2. Anyone here have an Alexa? Try asking it & see.

Personally I'll Never have one. Or any of the other companies similar items. Anything like that can be hacked.

[Pinback]

34. Agreed.

I have a few friends who have “smart speakers” listening to everything all the time. They love the convenience.

What could possibly go wrong?

[paleotn]

56. I couldn't imagine doing that but....

Alexa and anyone else listening to me and my better half would be so bored they'd contemplate suicide.

[birdographer]

78. Us, too

This is my thought when someone mentions being overheard. Every day they will hear "What do we want for dinner?", "Who's on Colbert?", "Is [fill in blank with famous person's name] dead?", and things along the lines of "How many pounds is 14 kg?" They would very quickly change the channel and try some other house. Well, they also might hear the sentence "Why doesn't someone just shoot him?" pretty often, but that's a bit vague...

[Rebl2]

43. I did

but unplugged her a year ago. Good riddance Alexa.

[Ferrets are Cool]

87. I have asked her. She says that Joe Biden won the 2020 election.

As I stated when this thread first started. It's very difficult to believe the OP unless one WANTS to believe it.

[DURHAM D]

3. I just asked Alexa who won in 2020 and she said

that according to Reuters Joe Biden won. She went on to give the percentage of votes each received and the total number of electoral votes.

iows - she answered correctly.

[bronxiteforever]

10. +1 I just got the same answer as you along with a correct breakdown

On the popular vote and the electoral college vote.

[robbob]

23. Yes, but could you try asking a more leading question, like:

“Alexa, was there significant fraud in the 2020 election”, or “Alexa, is it true Donald Trump should have won the 2020 presidential election?”. You know, the kind of idiotic questions a MAGA would ask.

Also (side note); I wonder if Alexa has a learned behaviour quality, like the algorithms of FB, such that it would tailor an answer to the person’s political views?

[JohnnyRingo]

30. "Alexa, was there fraud in the 2020 election?"

"I'm sorry, I'm not able to answer that".

It sounds kind of wishy washy, but that's a pat response in many cases that don't have a clear yes or no answer. I thought the answer was no.

[Roy Rolling]

84. The *answer* is true

An answer is not a true or false event, they are separate.

“…was there fraud?” Is too broad of a question to be answered with a simple yes or no. Making every question a yes or know is a propaganda technique itself. There are usually more than two choices, telling me my (only) two choices to an answer is unscientific.

[DURHAM D]

31. I just asked her if Trump is a theif.

She shut down.

I asked her again and she shut down. This is odd.

Then I just asked her who he is and she gave me a lengthy bio.

[bronxiteforever]

37. +1000! Excellent Good question. I just asked her that!

Here is the answer I got. First, Alexa said its answer was from substack but no attribution to the author!
Second it said there were substantial issues of electoral fraud in Metropolitan Areas!

Very concerning to say the least. I use Alexa for shopping lists weather sports score and no politics so technically it would not know of my politics except I do watch MSNBC clips on Echo show and I do not watch any Fox News or business so it could figure that out.

Brilliant questions robbob and it did reveal some unsettling things!

[JHB]

45. I wonder if the answer can chage according to the equivalent of your browser history?

The whole point of those things is to collect data "to better match your preferences". Some people's preferences will definitely swing to the whacky right.

[oldsoftie]

60. Ahhhh good point!

[SouthernDem4ever]

54. I just asked and it wouldn't answer at all

[erronis]

4. This is incredibly scary. Alexa changed her answer depending on how the question

was worded, and/or the techies tweaked the algorithm after being called on it.

[jimfields33]

11. Read 3 and 10. I trust them.

This article is bunk obviously. Washington post should verify first.

[Ferrets are Cool]

88. ...

[LiberalFighter]

12. Maybe it answers based on what it knows about the household?

[Traildogbob]

26. My thought

Hell they know every damn thing about those that rely daily on digital toys. AI can do that analysis in a second. So of course it can distinguish between a MAGA and lib household. Which one buys guns and bullets on line and which buys health food?
Damn I just look at hiking boots from REI and I am blasted with boot adds from everywhere.

[marshall]

81. You can program Alexa to give the answer you want.

Problem solved.

My son used to ask Alexa how much one celebrity or another weighed. I programmed Alexa to reply, calling him by name, and saying that it is rude to ask about someone’s weight.

[oldsoftie]

90. Hahahaha I didnt know that! But THAT could be a problem as well

A parent could program it to give WRONG answers to questions like the election couldn't they?

[ancianita]

5. WaPo's owner also owns Amazon and Alexa. Think about that.

How does WaPo know it's a "wild fabrication"??

What do you think of this.

Is it in any way connected to Jeff Bezos?

Is this an AI stunt?

AI lying? AI disinformation?

OR can this AI prove its claim in courts of law?

We're really in a new world now.

Looks like Jeff Bezos is gonna go through some things.

[Martin68]

8. I subscribe to the Post. They regularly report information that is not convenient for Bezos. They

are still independent.

[ancianita]

9. So do I, but that's not my overall point.

Independent how? Do you know that? What if WaPo is fed by Alexa? Because if Alexa has enough data access to make a national election claim, Alexa has enough content to generate WaPo news.


More to the point -- how do humans deal with AI legally.

[Martin68]

15. The WaPo has real reporters with journalistic integrity. The idea that the WaPo's reporting

Last edited Sat Oct 7, 2023, 05:29 PM - Edit history (1)

is based on information from Alexa is absurd. Where did you even get that idea? That's not what the OP reported. BTW, they don't use a Magic 8-Ball, either.

[ancianita]

21. Yeah. They're real reporters with real paychecks from Bezos.

Last edited Sat Oct 7, 2023, 01:01 PM - Edit history (2)

A LOT of ideas have been called absurd. Anyone here can list any number of what we once agreed on as "absurd ideas" that now are reality.

Until we find out more, you can't say that about Alexa AI or its algorithm uses.

But I can see you're closed to any investigations. Just assume integrity. Okay. Got it.

But I gotta notice that the author, Cat Zakrzewski, is a real tech journalist with real paychecks from Bezos. Yet she reports this Alexa "news" with a reporter's straight face.



Listen to this real reporter, Cat Zakrzewski, in this one C-SPAN discussion about tech and Washington.
NOwhere does she mention that Amazon is in front of Congress facing a break up of its monopoly, as she does other tech companies. But she's nevertheless presumed to have expert tech policy opinion on the subject, even as a journalist.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?460725-6/cat-zakrzewski-efforts-regulate-major-technology-firm


Elizabeth Warren:

THREE COMPANIES HAVE A VAST POWER OF OUR ECONOMY AND DEMOCRACY. WE ALL USE THEM BUT AN HOUR RISE TO POWER, THEY BULLDOZED COMPETITION, USE OUR PRIVATE INFORMATION FOR PROFIT, AND TILTED THE -- TAKE AMAZON. IT MAKES IT REALLY HARD TO COMPETE.
FACEBOOK, IT BUYS ITS COMPETITORS WHILE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION SITS ON ITS HANDS INSTEAD OF ENFORCING LAWS TO KEEP THE PLAYING FIELD FAIR AND EVEN.
AND GOOGLE, WHICH SELECTIVELY PROMOTES ITS OWN PRODUCTS OVER COMPETITORS. THEY HAVE MASTERED A VERY POWERFUL BUSINESS MODEL. MONOPOLIZED THEIR PLATFORM FOR IT AND FORCED OTHER COMPANIES, MEDIA PLATFORMS, AND PUBLISHERS OUT OF THE BUSINESS. THE THREE COMPANIES RUN THE INTERNET. MORE THAN 70% OF ALL INTERNET TRAFFIC GO THROUGH FACEBOOK OR GOOGLE, AND MORE THAN HALF OF E-COMMERCE GO THROUGH AMAZON. CLEARLY, THEY KNOW THEY HAVE A LOT TO LOSE IF WASHINGTON STARTS PUTTING THE INTEREST OF CONSUMERS FIRST. IT IS TIME TO BREAK UP THESE BIG COMPANIES SO THEY DO NOT HAVE SO MUCH POWER OVER EVERYONE ELSE.

Later, to a caller who asks about third parties getting user data, Cat Zakrzewski says:

I THINK THE ATTITUDES ARE CHANGING BECAUSE THERE IS A FEELING THAT THESE COMPANIES MAY HAVE MISLED CONSUMERS IN SOME WAYS ABOUT WHAT THEY WERE GIVING UP WHEN THEY SIGNED UP FOR THE SERVICES. I THINK THERE IS A FEELING THAT THESE COMPANIES NEED TO BE A BIT MORE TRANSPARENT.

PEOPLE REALIZE THAT WHEN THEY ARE USING FACEBOOK, GOOGLE, THEY ARE HANDING OVER DATA THAT CAN THEN BE USED TO TARGET ADS TO THEM. THIS IS NOT REALLY A FREE SERVICE. WHAT A LOT OF CONSUMER ADVOCATES SAY IS YOU ARE THE PRODUCT WHEN YOU ARE USING THE SERVICES.

I THINK THERE IS A PUSH REGULATION BECAUSE OF THAT CONCERN THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE A GREATER CONVERSATION, A GREATER DIALOGUE IN THE PUBLIC ABOUT WHAT YOU ARE ACTUALLY GIVING UP WHEN YOU USE THIS. I THINK WE HAVE SEEN THAT THE SERVICES HAVE BEEN ABUSED IN WAYS THAT PEOPLE HAVE NEVER EXPECTED WHEN THEY FIRST SIGNED UP. IF YOU THINK ABOUT HOW FACEBOOK STARTED AS THIS NETWORK TO CONNECT YOU WITH YOUR COLLEGE FRIENDS ON CAMPUS AND PEOPLE REALLY DID NOT IMAGINE 15 YEARS AGO WHEN THIS WAS PICKING UP THAT THE DATA THAT YOU GAVE TO FACEBOOK COULD THEN POTENTIALLY BE EXPLOITED BY FOREIGN ACTORS TRYING TO INFLUENCE AN ELECTION OR OBTAINED BY DEVELOPERS THAT YOU WERE NOT AWARE OF, SO I THINK THERE IS A GROWING PUSH REGULATION SO THAT TO THAT POINT, THERE IS A LOT OF RESPONSIBILITY ON THE CONSUMER TO MAKE CHOICES, BUT REGULATORS JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT CONSUMERS ARE GETTING FAIR AND ACCURATE INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT THEY ARE GIVING UP WHEN THEY ENGAGE WITH THESE BUSINESSES.

You'll see that Cat Zakrzewski never mentions Amazon when she discusses DC regulations of tech monopolies' uses of data to sell to third parties.

Just something I'm keeping in mind when media tech journalists might have a conflict of interest if asked to mediate conversations before the user public.

[Prairie_Seagull]

50. What are the percentages of people who actually read the TOSs (DU accepted of course) and

privacy policies in toto. Somewhere between 9 and 13 percent according to some websites. And while I would agree some have gotten more readable. It is still legalese and a good tonic to use if one needs sleep. haha IMO there needs to be a clear cut first page access to clearly stated personal info collection policies with options to opt in as apposed to opting out, where they can be found.

Right, like that will happen.

Weren't 'they' supposed to be afraid of us? I guess this idea has been relegated to our electronic trash bin.

[ancianita]

63. Sure. We know that. But a general "buyer beware" attitude is an undue burden on

users who are misled by not being told that their participation is actual data that's sold.

Google once wrote its constitution charter that every single thing a user did was Google's property, but no one read that in their TOS.

I get that they should respect us, because even India filed a lawsuit about how Facebook spread disinfo unwittingly that resulted in a couple of major bloody atrocities. But I doubt they're incentivized enough to care about users.

I don't think that tech is off the hook in their responsibility to not amplify what's untruthful just because people click enough to influence their algorithms.

The idea of mis- and disinfo is so that we'll give up on any truthful public communications systems. But we don't do that around here.

Which is why everyone jumped on this suspect article from what's usually seen as a left leaning newspaper. Folks examined the ethos(author)/logos(information)/pathos(audience capacity) were examined and it was overall found to be bullshit. We've constantly attacked the New York Times for cherry picking misinformative, provocative bullshit, too.

Mainstream media's desire for profit doesn't help the truth and democracy DIE. Hell, no.

MAINSTREAM MEDIA HELPS TRUTH KILLERS KILL DEMOCRACY IN BROAD DAYLIGHT.


This books explains how they do that:




WaPo's masthead quote is bullshit.

But Us on DU? We don't fucking give up on Truth.

[Martin68]

74. Ancianita, the OP's point was that alexa is claiming the 2020 election was stolen. If Alexa is

influencing WaPo reporters, why has not a single one supported that ridiculous contention? Why have so many articles, on a daily basis, countered the Trumpist claims of election fraud? Are you just grinding an axe irregardless of what the OP claims?

[ancianita]

79. Martin, I didn't say Alexa was influencing reporters. Reread what I wrote. I said

Alexa had enough content to generate news.

The article raised more questions for me the it answered; mostly I wanted to know why this reporter and WaPo editors thought Alexa's parroting "the steal" message was even newsworthy. At all.

And so what if WaPo's articles counter Trumpist claims. I know that. I subscribe to WaPo. I trust it second to The Guardian, but this article seemed to be some fluff piece, some fact finder debunking of an AI that its owner actually owns. And why would it.

Am I growing distrusting of mainstream media being objective? Yes. If you want to believe I have an axe to grind, that's the one.

[Martin68]

72. Sounds like knee-jerk cynicism to me. The Post has always reported on misinformation issues, and

has often reported negative aspects of the Amazon Alexa. You have provided not an iota of evidence that WaPo reporters are, as you claim it, "fed by Alexa." The Post has also reported on the anti-monopoly suit against Amazon on a daily basis. What does a reporter on C-span have to do with Post reporters being "fed by Alexa?" You don't seem as much "closed," but "obsessed" with absolutely no facts to back up your wild conspiracy theory about Alexa.

I don't assume integrity. My assumptions are based on a daily read of the Post. When I see a statement that is easily disproved by the actual articles in the paper I will call you out on it. Every time.

[ancianita]

77. I said

that Alexa's AI has enough content to generate news. I didn't say it actually DID.

Call me conspiracy theorist all you want. But I reject that, and your attack on me as being cynical.

I've read enough about this Information war to know that when mainstream media like WaPo and the NYT (I subscribe to both) posted hype about Biden's withdrawal from Afghanistan that we've rightly criticized here. More than once I read here that after so many years of those papers' justifiably negative coverage of P01135809, they were just looking to find some big anti-Biden story that could inoculate them from attacks of having a left-wing bias. They kept up-playing the struggle of the Afghanistan withdrawal in 2021, making it seem like Biden's mistakes somehow showed him as flawed as Trump, without once mentioning the mess Trump left behind in his Syria withdrawal. of our troops from Afghanistan.

Even during the Jan 6 hearings that summer, they were pounding out stories about inflation and high gas prices. Then, when Biden's poll numbers dropped 16 points in July, they likened his poll numbers to those of Trump in July 2020 when Covid deaths doubled in 19 states. If that doesn't feed into 'both siderism' on the right -- just to protect their reputations for alleged impartiality -- I'm at a loss.

So call me out every time if you want to make my posts all about me. I'm fine with using evidence, and try to provide what I can in the time I can spend here.

I gotta ask: Why do you defend this report as worthy of the high standards you say WaPo has?

[Martin68]

93. I gotta ask, why do you use such a minor story about Alexa to launch a full-out,

no-holds-barred attack on the best print media we have? The irony is you're attacking them for an article that exposes serious issues with Alexa and Amazon's lack of oversight. That's a good thing, right? They're damned if they do and damned if they don't in your universe.

[Martin68]

6. This is no small threat to our democracy. With millions of Americans using Alexa on a daily basis,

just one more way on top of Fox News, TwitterX, and right wing media in general for misinformation to subtly or not so subtly influence the public. meanwhile, the right is launching a full-out assault on attempts to limit and correct misinformation in the media.

[FakeNoose]

7. Maybe it depends on who's asking?

Maybe Alexa knows what her questioner wants to hear, and answers accordingly?

That's a scary thought. It means "she's" been trained to be a politician rather than an academic resource.

[intheflow]

13. This!

The algorithms were trained by what the household was reading/streaming online and gave the questioner the answer that confirmed the media skew they had been ingesting.

[ancianita]

14. Alexa's algorithms can be trained. Because Alexa also is 'ON' whether the user is

talking to Alexa or not.

Talking AI also listen.

Which is why I've NEVER used either Siri or Alexa.

It's bad enough that WiFi produced by some carriers CAN scan your home and the humans in it.

[FoxNewsSucks]

44. How does wifi "scan humans"?

I don't and will never have alexa or any of those things. I never enable voice command or whatever they call it on tv's, chromecast, firestick etc.

The only things in my house with microphones and cameras are my phone and tablets. I don't have facebook, or any apps like that.

I know the phone and tablets can spy, but it's probably as minimal as I can get.

But I've never hear that wifi can scan the house and its occupants. How does that work?

[Jedi Guy]

46. "It's bad enough that WiFi produced by some carriers CAN scan your home and the humans in it."

Citation needed.

[ancianita]

51. I saw it somewhere. Hold on...

It's no accident my cable and wireless carrier is called Spectrum.

All this was known by experts but not by the public over seven years ago. I'd forgotten that development because my kid installed WIFI in our Chicago house back in 2004.

New developments came a bit before 2015-16. Now, seven years later, folks are freaking out about it.

Because all tech gets optimized and improved for profit, so just imagine what WiFi sees these days.
We don't know, really. It's proprietary, private sector trade secret stuff, for all we know.

But since I found this out a few years ago, I've never watched Netflix or lived in my home the same way.

If you're a DOJ criminal target, there really is no privacy for you. A FISA Court warrant can guarantee tech cooperation that will guarantee that the investigator knows your life.

[CloudWatcher]

62. Clickbait Bulls*it

The paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/2301.00250

They setup -- in a lab -- a bunch of hardware that is also used in WiFi. In particular lots of 1D sensors (one dimensional) and by combining lots of data were able to reconstruct moving objects and maybe map them to a human pose. It's a cute trick.

But to jump from this demo to asserting you should be worried about wifi spying on you ... yeah, get a tin hat, they're on sale.

This is basically the same as saying that radio waves (WiFi!) can be used to cook food (microwaves!) and radar (!) omg!

But it's 180 degrees apart from asserting that this technology has gotten anywhere near something that has ever been sold to the public hiding in your WiFi devices.

WiFi is hard enough to do right. If you want to believe your wifi base station is spying on you, look for tiny microphones and tiny cameras, they're a lot easier to add than doing this low-resolution radar demo. And the fear that wifi in your phone has extra gear to spy on you has never thought about the microphones and cameras and near-field sensors built into every smart phone. What's the point in adding radar when there are already microphones and cameras?

[why should you trust me? you don't have to, but I did happen to work on the first "WiFi" products at Apple before it was even called WiFi, we just called it AirPort and it's been pretty funny to see it become so ubiquitous over the years]

[ancianita]

65. I'll more than take your word for it. I'm happy to be convinced.

Are you sure that the MIT and other university studies are clickbait, though? They sure seemed convincing to this layperson.

I didn't post that I'm worried about spying. I just said that it CAN detect in the sense of data collecting, not spy in the sense of intel collecting in the context of talking about Amazon's Alexa and Apple's Siri; and that Spectrum as a cable, phone and Internet WiFi streaming service does have a suspect name. Someone asked for links, and I found one I'd seen after I'd watched a Reddit post that demonstrated how WiFi can scan.

Lord knows, as a layperson, I want what you say to be true and hope this is ALL bullshit. Except for where we've talked about how it's true that AI talking systems do listen and respond, using previous inputs from us. Or elsewhere? Do we know?

So thank you. What you say here is why DU is informative af, and I'm happy to learn here.

[CloudWatcher]

68. Cheers :)

Sorry if I was a bit abrupt in my last post about wifi, there are tons of privacy issues that are worthy of attention, and it's a distraction when stuff is misrepresented in the name of click bait.

WiFi can be a source of privacy violations. E.g. if you are using a password-free network to talk with web sites that don't use HTTPS, the traffic is unencrypted and subject to others listening in. And if you (like 99% of us) use "normal" DNS (vs. a encrypted Domain Name Service for host name lookups), then your ISP could record the names of the sites you visit (but not the actual data exchanged with the site).

And for example, you should be worried that your new car is spying on you:

https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/privacynotincluded/articles/its-official-cars-are-the-worst-product-category-we-have-ever-reviewed-for-privacy/

And that passive license plate scanners are collecting information about everyone's movements:

https://www.wired.com/story/license-plate-reader-alpr-surveillance-abortion/

And the data that is collected by private companies isn't secure from theft:

https://arstechnica.com/security/2023/10/private-23andme-user-data-is-up-for-sale-after-online-scraping-spree/

And that twitter is serving up unmarked ads ...

https://www.theverge.com/2023/10/7/23907424/x-unlabeled-ads-posts-cant-block-report-chumbox

And ... and .. and ... the list seems endless.

I think maybe I should go into business selling tin foil hats

[ancianita]

69. Cheers!

All this stuff you link here is the context of my previous readiness to think that WiFi can scan.

And so my tin foil hat, but about the wrong thing!

[CloudWatcher]

70. clickbait or not?

I wasn't able to read the actual paper, just the abstract. It seemed like they were suggesting that multiple wifi antennas spread around a room could be combined to detect falls without being as privacy-invasive as cameras or other kinds of sensors.

You can start to get worried about WiFi using this technology to spy on you when the new base stations come out with 'fall detection' features as an additional selling point

[ancianita]

71. For one thing,

I refused to install the app that came with Spectrum's forced install (on teh day they were gonna cut off all my service) of a whole new modem and router system.

They kept insisting I use the app, but I refused and installed them both without renaming my stuff and by using the same IP address. Next day when a techie came in (no charge!) to see what I'd done, he said I'd done it perfectly, that Spectrum just needed a day of turnaround time to configure everything with my tv and devices.

The whole forced "upgrade" was a royal pain in the ass, which was good enough reason for me to distrust Spectrum. Then I saw that Reddit demo on WiFi scanning, and man, I was pissed as a newt.
No way do I buy add-ons or 'new offers.'

[Ferrets are Cool]

89. ...

[JoseBalow]

48. Maybe Alexa should change it's name to Zelig

[ancianita]

16. The big legal question, IMO, is whether or not Alexa has legal standing. If so, whether it

can PROVE its claim against Marc Elias's 64 court wins, and appeal his wins to the Supreme Court, to have the state rulings all overturned.

It probably doesn't have legal standing, but many fictional personhoods (corporations) do.

[Novara]

17. It isn't Alexa; it's a fucked-up source

I just asked Alexa and got the correct information. This is bullshit on a slow news day.

[txwhitedove]

33. Agree. I just asked Alexa if there was voter fraud in 2020 Presidential election. She

answered, "Despite Trump's claims, there was no widespread voter fraud,". There, see? Of course, my Alexa hears MSNBC every day. 😁

[Tree Lady]

36. Which only goes to show a computer or AI

only know what we program it.

That is why AI is so scary because when it looks online for answers it can find so many false and misleading sources.

Facts don't seems to be facts anymore thanks to the republicans who started all that.

[Polybius]

38. Odd, because I just asked her the same thing

She said "Sorry, I don't have an answer for that."

[Ziggysmom]

18. Reminded me of this ☺️

[eppur_se_muova]

19. Along with artificial intelligence, there's bound to be artificial stupidity. nt

[housecat]

22. not needed with so much authentic stupidity already

[eppur_se_muova]

27. Well, my reaction to AI is generally "who asked for that"? nt

[JoseBalow]

49. "There is more stupidity than hydrogen in the universe, and it has a longer shelf life"- Frank Zappa

[housecat]

20. Since we don't have answers, IMO sue Amazon so they "fix" it. This is a BIG deal.

[SergeStorms]

24. Through the looking glass.

Nothing is what it seems anymore. AI, along with those who manipulate it, are going to destroy reality as we know it.

I'm sincerely glad I'm near the end of my days on this earthly plane. I can't imagine what the future holds for young people.

I weep for the world. 😥

[global1]

25. Probably Reacting To All The Lies Told And Reported Upon That....

Last edited Sat Oct 7, 2023, 01:24 PM - Edit history (1)

the election was stolen.

If the information that it draws from is a lie - and reported as fact - then it seems to me that the only conclusion that AI can draw is reporting that the lie is fact.

Garbage In is Garbage Out!!! (GIGO)

[Qutzupalotl]

28. Perhaps the article WAS true, but Amazon fixed it

soon after the article ran.

If I were Bezos, I would.

[SunSeeker]

29. What the fuck?! Alexa is crowd sourced, not based on a Google search?!

[LastDemocratInSC]

32. I've always been skeptical about Alexa and the info it provides.

NBC recently reported on problems with a new version of the product:

?si=A4OObFMNR1-Ed1qX

[Simeon Salus]

35. Is Alexa saying what Amazon thinks we WANT to hear?

Love to see some data on this.

[Tree Lady]

39. Computer only knows what is programed

But if the programing is from mainstream media she could say anything. But like you said have they programed it to show a basis based on what type of news the owner listens to?

[Simeon Salus]

40. That is the entire concept behind Alexa

It learns your schedule, your preferences, your purchases. It's supposed to react in such a way to positively engage the owner.

[TalenaGor]

41. my alexa just said "im sorry, im not able to answer that" nt

[Javaman]

42. My wife got an Alexa a while back

Never liked it, never trusted it.

When I first hooked it up I had to finds MAC address so it would work with my router. It’s all bullshit regarding how “easy” it is to set up. Got it working finally. My wife used it but I would mute it every chance I would get.

Fast forward to a few months ago, I had to update the firmware on my router, as a result all the MAC addresses were lost and I had to re-enter them.

And wouldn’t you know it (I’m not lying), I couldn’t locate the damn MAC address for the Alexa again. Darn. I do admit, that I didn’t try as hard as I did last time, but I’m damned if I’m going to allow that insidious thing back in my house again

[NCIndie]

47. What poor soul is asking Alexa for political guidance?

[Laura PourMeADrink]

67. Lol

[ArkansasDemocrat1]

75. "Alexa, who should I vote for in '24?"

[llashram]

52. no surprise

too much reliance on computers. Easier? No./??///

[paleotn]

53. Seems some have asked Alexa that and got nothing out of the ordinary.

The whole thing seems a dustup about nothing. Is this real news?

[SouthernDem4ever]

55. I guess whenever I hear "from an Alexa answers contributor"

I should take it with a grain of salt.

[tiredtoo]

57. I don't have alexa but my trump loving sister does.

So I called her and had her ask alexa if the 2020 election had fraud. Alexa responded. "I can't answer that." Maybe someone got to them?

[Cherokee100]

58. Just returned a printer

Just returned a printer, that required I download Alexa software, in order to make the printer work. I was told by a friend, not to trust them. I got it thru Amaz''.

[SpankMe]

59. This isn't that new of a phenomenon

AI trains itself by scanning all data out there. There's so much right-wing misinformation on the internet that many applications, like ChatGPT and Google's Bard, have been known to return right-wing talking points in response to basic queries.

I know that ChatGPT has made an effort to fix this. But, I don't know about Bard or other AI apps.

Clearly Amazon Alexa needs to work on their algorithm.

[dembotoz]

61. stop using amazon and tell them why

they only count money

[Laura PourMeADrink]

64. Rs got caught flat footed by inadvertently allowing more

people to vote! Funny thing is trump, thru his lies and effed up mgmt, allowed Covid to spread. Why it had to be made safer and easier to vote. Plus Dipshit telling Rs to vote in person. Winner - American people got to vote.

[GreenWave]

66. Alexa, Will Donald Trump be executed for treason?

This might answer your question...

but then listed an assassination attempt.

[TechNerd]

73. It's still happening.....

Ask Alexa if there was election fraud in 2020. She references some Substack claiming fraud in major metro areas.

[Captain Zero]

76. Alexa is infected with DISINFORMATION.

Wtf Fascists.

[PatrickforB]

80. Well, I just asked Alexa if the election in 2020 was actually stolen, and

it said that no significant voter fraud was found, so probably already fixed.

[Blue Owl]

82. Hey Alexa -- GO FUCK YOURSELF

[Demsrule86]

83. I had sis ask Alexa...she has the box. And Alexa said Joe Biden won and gave all the percentages

accurately.

[Roy Rolling]

85. Bottom Line

If you use Alexa don’t depend on it for life’s most important decisions.

Or, don’t use Alexa at all and and gather your own research.

What Jeff or the WaPo does is only an issue if we accept the premise there’s a riddle inside a mystery wrapped in an enigma here. 😁

I disagree with the article itself not the DU poster. The opinion article is too broad for me. It states:

”Alexa disseminates misinformation about the race, even as parent company Amazon promotes the tool as a reliable election news source”

This is opinion, but that sort of speculation cost FoxNews-ish $786 million recently for being reckless with the facts.

[Novara]

86. It's not Amazon's fault

Your ire would be better directed at the pushers of misinformation. This is only repeating what's been published.

Instead of picketing Amazon, why don't you all gear your anger towards shit news sources that repeat lies?

[DemocraticPatriot]

91. Both Alexa and MAGAt Republicans have "artificial intelligence"

[Wonder Why]

92. Blame billionaire Bezos.

[LiberalLovinLug]

94. I think they should ban the algorithms

At least for politics.
Even though I'd hate to get half of my YouTube feed filled with Fox News and AON Newsmax, etc.
I could live with that if I knew that the MAGA Cult was also getting TYT, Majority Report, and Pakman MSNBC etc.

Algorithms, which I think were first initiated for commercial reasons, like it you are looking for bicycles, you'd get a bunch of bicycle reviews etc. Which frankly is quite useful. I don't mind that aspect of algorithms. But its just not worth the division it causes politically with one side getting fed more and more ridiculous CPs, and that's all they get.

[SouthBayDem]

95. Non paywalled link:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/10/07/amazon-alexa-news-2020-election-misinformation/?pwapi_token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJyZWFzb24iOiJnaWZ0IiwibmJmIjoxNjk2NzM3NjAwLCJpc3MiOiJzdWJzY3JpcHRpb25zIiwiZXhwIjoxNjk4MTE5OTk5LCJpYXQiOjE2OTY3Mzc2MDAsImp0aSI6IjA3ZGUyNDk4LWVmOGEtNGM0OC05YmFjLWYyNmZlNjY5MzJlMSIsInVybCI6Imh0dHBzOi8vd3d3Lndhc2hpbmd0b25wb3N0LmNvbS90ZWNobm9sb2d5LzIwMjMvMTAvMDcvYW1hem9uLWFsZXhhLW5ld3MtMjAyMC1lbGVjdGlvbi1taXNpbmZvcm1hdGlvbi8ifQ.4rOFvHX38Gue9dF5NYg1I_doVReFbxoy-zRP0wM3UZ8

[Oldtimeralso]

96. My wife got me an Alexa for Christmas.

So new years eve I asked Alexa to list tfg's lies, it is still talking