"Op-ed" is short for "opinion editorial." Opinions are, by definition, biased. HTH
@Bujbrother Says:
Ana’s outrage is absurd. Would she suggest a union leader shouldn’t be able to write about the importance of defending the right to strike? As long as they disclose, readers can judge if the argument they are making makes sense. The fact that they stand to make money does not automatically invalidate their arguments. Transparency is about disclosure. These experts don’t cease to be experts because of their company.
@valentinoesposito3614 Says:
AI tracks and acquires enemy targets and guide the weapons on target
@myownbiz5461 Says:
yeah..go to the last five seconds of the ad, where it says it's sponsored by "The Committee to Support This Issue"..that's IF you can read the small print it's in!
@user-pq7jj3vs3e Says:
TYT are liars. They will tell us how ‘legacy media’ is terrible but turn around and drive ALL THEIR CONTENT from whatever is reported in legacy media. You can’t suck at the tete of msm and tell us it is bitter. Either don’t use them or make a nuanced critique
@ryanrash6813 Says:
Yall are foreal deranged. Please. Im not a paying member but these people reek of ignorance
@ryanrash6813 Says:
The fact these people dont understand how additional funding is necessary for a strategy shift is jarring. Chek please please please. Real these dumb … in
@ryanrash6813 Says:
Wow. Never thought I’d agree with the bots but Anna. Stfu
@ultrapotus Says:
Anas Cuban husband is brain washing her.
@thecatsbackyard4833 Says:
It is painfully obvious that our military budget is funding the technologies of our future oppression. That's the reason for this NYT rhetoric
@The_Accuser Says:
Ana Kasparian = Tulsi Gabbard 2.0
@MWhaleK Says:
Skynet is coming.
@blackbird4046 Says:
0:22 It was revealed last year that the USAF tried an AI-operated drone (in two simulations) that basically turned into EDI (Extreme Deep Invader/"Eddy") from the 2005 movie "Stealth". After learning that it got points for killing targets, it killed the (simulated) human operator for stopping it from doing so; after retraining to not do that, it destroyed the comm tower in a subsequent simulation to silence further orders -- TECHNICALLY not killing the operator.
> 2023-JUN-02: _"US: AI-controlled drone turns against its human operator"_ -- WION: https://youtu.be/eDNjeTwGi5E
1:00 Israel is already using AI for sentry guns, and target generation:
> 2022-OCT-03: _"Israel installs AI-powered gun at West Bank checkpoint as riot control"_ -- South China Morning Post: https://youtu.be/EHikkj8mjWE
> 2023-DEC-01: _"Israel using AI to generate targets in Gaza, increasing civilian toll"_ -- Democracy Now!: https://youtu.be/KT7znz0eNFE
> 2024-APR-05: _"Lavender & WheresDaddy: How Israel used AI to form kill lists & bomb Palestinians in their homes"_ -- Democracy Now!: https://youtu.be/4RmNJH4UN3s
5:06 Raj Shah, the former WH spokesperson?:
> 2018-MAY-30: _"Trump busted leaking classified info during New York fundraiser"_ -- The Ring of Fire: https://youtu.be/doZXonDNcXI
@mattwhitely1067 Says:
AI will be a big deal it will just take way longer than the dumb mythical timeline some of these wall street investors put out there
@wfjhDUI Says:
The problem with the article isn't journalistic ethics and I have no clue why TYT would frame it that way. This is an opinion piece run in the opinion section and the affiliations of the authors is stated at the very top of the article. Other criticisms aside, the article isn't "biased", it's "opinionated".
@ASaund-qb6wy Says:
How about we just say no to the next wave of war?
@Blinkyjedi Says:
Anna is reason shouldn’t vote. Glad she gets booties
@spacecadet28 Says:
conflict of interest? a union can't write to support their cause?
@MrVillabolo Says:
There are spammers on all TYT threads.
@joshuaboudreau5258 Says:
NYTimes is not worth wiping my ass with.
@iguesss Says:
🤡 doesn’t know what AI (Artificial Intelligence) even means.. “machine learning” in drone warfare is actually terrifying
@punchthem4582 Says:
Biased like the clown show TYT ?
@990mustang Says:
Yet democrats are biased towards allowing illegal migrants into our country!!
@user-wi3yx3gy2o Says:
Sounds kinda like a “mine shaft gap situation” (Dr Strangelove)
@GAMakin Says:
NYT IN CONCERT WITH DEFENSE CONTRACTORS AND A.i. DEVELOPERS...
Old song. New downbeat (BEAT DOWN?)
No offense intended... But you are [as are we all] Flyweights in the Ring with the Heavyweights.
🤷
Going to need Angels in our Corner.
@demarcusfaulkner7411 Says:
Silicone valley already owns part of the military
@Jeffrey.Blazer.4.20 Says:
TYT you are unbelievably NAIVE. How can you create this video without addressing the question of WHO owns the NY Times and do they also benefit financially from increase military spending. WAKE UP.
@ting280 Says:
my favorite part is the guy's examples. the Houthi and Hezbolla drones are automated but they're not true AI. you know what is true AI? Israel's Gospel. Israel's Lavender. Israel's "Where's Daddy". We knew from the start Gaza was just a testing ground for weapons systems. now we're seeing those weapons being advertised to US lawmakers in the NYT.
@marcfischer8644 Says:
I consider it pretty likely that with the black budgets of the DoD, they've developed and are developing technologies that go far beyond what the public knows, as they believe that they need such technologies to rapidly defeat their adversary in case of a major conflict with China and/or Russia and possibly Iran.
@L0kias1 Says:
TYT took 20 million from Jerry katinsberg investment fund …. How come they never talk about that ? What’s wrong with venture capitol ? They use it ?
@greatbritton89 Says:
I mean the purpose for this op-ed does have an ulterior motive, but ultimately the story isn't wrong. 🤷🏿♂️
@Bad.Pappy.Official Says:
Nothing’s shocking there.
@jeancharles788 Says:
Maybe we should use AI, actually i - intelligece, to improve diplomacy....
@sneifert1968 Says:
Do these people really believe that the US military doesn’t already possess these technologies and beyond? Where do they think the tech behind these new attacks came from? Yeah I’m sure the military never thought about AI drones, miniature attack drones laden with small but powerful munitions? Get real
@vertigo1997 Says:
I cancelled NYT and WAPO a long time ago.
@h.lonswearingenswearingen9643 Says:
The issue is very simple during the Vietnam war we lost the concept A gold economy, Which became a oil economy and now we have what is known as a military weapons economy.
@loki1913 Says:
The US military will DEFINE the future of warfare, specifically because we continue to be the benchmark that the rest of the world is measuring themselves against.
@josephsco Says:
good take Ana, appreciate your efforts lately
@tsunami2447 Says:
Remember how you and the rest of the Left Wing media blamed Trump for the people not trusting the media? Remember? I remember
@Baumboy715 Says:
Ana, if you don’t want them to profit off war then vote Trump
@davideisenberg1537 Says:
Often media organizations will agree to give op eds or even reported articles because the organization that benefits from that article agrees to place ads elsewhere or even in another issue. This practice hides that it's a sponsored article, but really is advertising
@tsunami2447 Says:
Wait.....when has the New York Times, not been blatantly bias? The 80's? Why is Ana clutching the pearls about something that's been obvious at least since Obama? Now the news has always been suspect, but when Obama became President you saw the media shift, from informative, to Entertainment. Blame Obama. It only took you all, what? 20 years to catch up to what Trump has been saying the entire time
@marianneexbrayat2431 Says:
There are small businesses who supply the military with honesty and at normal prices. They have no money to corrupt anyone or to pay lobbyists. And there are large corporations
@marianneexbrayat2431 Says:
The NY and LA Times lost all credibility during the ramp up and unrolling of the 2nd Iraq war. They’ve become the government mouthpiece. No longer reliable source nor balanced analysis
@TheHunterofWarriors Says:
Last time I was in the military, the US generals are pretty much bought and paid for by defense contractors. We don't go with the cheapest contractor, we go with the one that bought the best general. As far as the equipment, the contractors make the most money on the contract and then the maintenance of that poor equipment. In the 1980s I remember one of the sayings was that we had lost more specialist to the Apache helicopter than to any enemy Nation
@TheHunterofWarriors Says:
We pay 35 times more for drones that need constant maintenance and are not nearly as quick as Mexico's drones. Mexico's drones are 25 times faster. We thought they were UFOs for their speed and maneuverability. We will still spend 50 times more for ours starting January 2025.
@TheHunterofWarriors Says:
We pay 35 times more for drones that need constant maintenance and are not nearly as quick as Mexico's drones. Mexico's drones are 25 times faster. We thought they were UFOs for their speed and maneuverability. We will still spend 50 times more for ours starting January 2025.
@TheHunterofWarriors Says:
I haven't subscribed to nyt in 8 years for this reason and for it's very biased news. Tyt does a better job.
@ngana8755 Says:
This is absurd. A "guest essay" at the NY Times means a self-interested party can publish THEIR point of view in the NY Times. The Times editorial page specifically states that guest essays do not reflect the editorial policy of the Times.
LATEST COMMENTS