Wikipedia downgrades CNET's reliability rating after AI-generated articles

I don't know about CNET, but having participated for a while in the Articles for Deletion forum, I have little credibility for any opinion from 'the' Wikipedia.

You need a majority of whatever number of people show up to delete a page. It is ridiculous. And it always seems to be Deletionists that show up.

So if 'the' Wikipedia downgrades CNET, it's probably anti-AI nuts with an axe to grind. I have little stock in this.

> CNET issued a statement that claims that the site maintains high editorial standards.

The "high" they're mentioning there must be the marijuana one (aka the editors are permanently stoned), rather than the generally accepted meaning of "high editorial standards".

CNET has been circling the drain for years.

If you know anything about their parent company this downgrade is warranted.

I'm quite happy that content farms are spewing out AI articles left and right, we might finally get to the point where regular people start to follow individual writers and editors instead of brands. They're only about to get away with this because it doesn't actually matter who writes the articles they are so boring and generic.