• joey_builds@eviltoast.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 hour ago

    Whatever the agent was actually doing, the real failure is that it had destructive write access to the only copy of finished work. That’s a permissions problem before it’s an AI problem — no automation, human or otherwise, should be able to hard-delete production assets without a human confirming the destructive step.

    The fact that the season is just gone also tells me there was no immutable backup or soft-delete tier behind it, which is rough for a broadcast workflow where the footage is irreplaceable. Agents are getting broad tool access by default right now, and this is the cautionary tale for giving them delete rights alongside read rights.

  • VibeSurgeon@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    73
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 hours ago

    The article plainly states that the production company says it wasn’t AI, but instead that it was human error that led to the data loss.

    The AI-thing was merely a rumour.

    • frongt@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Humans run AI. Even if it was deleted by AI, it’s still the responsibility of the person running it.

      • kewjo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 hours ago

        i would say it’s the fault of whoever thought it was a good idea to hook it up to their data. the workers are just doing what they’re paid to do and trying to put up with literal insanity or risk termination.

        • Railcar8095@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          37 minutes ago

          I blame the one who should have set the backups. Even if it was deleted by a malicious actor, they there’s no excuse to not have backups

    • Weep@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      they say specifically “inte är en ”AI-agent som agerat självständigt”” (double quote). which translate to an "not an “AI agent which acted independently”. so depending if that counts as human error or not… still up to to debate. It probably was AI, just not someone shift+delete the wrong folder.

      I do however blame the backup crew which definitely should’ve had their backups in place.

      • schipelblorp@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        19
        ·
        4 hours ago

        I’m reading in translation where he is credited with “leading” the program, which could be host or could be showrunner.

        As showrunner, he’d have more call to be there. As host, even less.

        “Someone majorly fucked up and also here’s a picture of someone” is kinda not great journalism, regardless.

        • ohulancutash@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          19
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 hours ago

          He’s the public face of the programme as the host. As in, when the show is mentioned, its his face people recognise. Its standard unremarkable journalistic practice. Paranoia is not a good look.

          • grue@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            51 minutes ago

            Being the host makes it very not likely that he was the one responsible for managing the footage since those are two different jobs. That makes it unfortunate, if not borderline-libelous, to put his face on this article and give the impression that he was the one responsible for the fuck-up.

            • ohulancutash@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              11 minutes ago

              Its simply not reasonable for anyone to get the idea that the host was responsible because they are pictured in the article.

          • Victor@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 hours ago

            Can confirm, he is the host.

            I don’t mind that he’s black, but he is cringe af as a television host. Not professional or eloquent at all. Not funny, but definitely trying his hardest to be so. Lame jokes that he laughs at himself, sometimes the only one who laughs, which is… uuughhh.

            I think he is there to appeal to a certain subdemographic of youth, and that is definitely not me. 😬 I can imagine certain people like him for his performance though.

            • mfed1122@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              3 hours ago

              “Not professional or eloquent at all. Not funny, but definitely trying his hardest to be so. Lame jokes that he laughs at himself”

              Sounds like the timeless qualifications for being a reality show host tbh

              • Victor@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                3 hours ago

                Well, we hold people to a higher standard on certain channels. A few select channels we expect a higher standard of entertainment because of their decades long history of quality. But uh, yeah. I guess this guy’s an acquired taste.