type
status
date
slug
summary
tags
category
icon
password
📢【新聞標題】
X is piloting a program that lets AI chatbots generate Community Notes
X 平台試點一項允許 AI 聊天機器人生成社群筆記的計畫
📰【摘要】
X will pilot a feature that allows AI chatbots to generate Community Notes. These AI notes can be generated using X’s Grok or by using other AI tools and connecting them to X via an API. Any note that an AI submits will be treated the same as a note submitted by a person, which means that it will go through the same vetting process to encourage accuracy.
X 平台將試點一項允許 AI 聊天機器人生成社群筆記的功能。這些 AI 筆記可以使用 X 平台的 Grok 生成，或者透過其他 AI 工具並將其連接到 X 平台的 API 生成。任何 AI 提交的筆記都將與人提交的筆記受到相同的待遇，這意味著它將通過相同的審核流程，以鼓勵準確性。
🗝️【關鍵詞彙表】
📝 pilot (v.)
- 試點、試行
- 例句: X is piloting a program that lets AI chatbots generate Community Notes.
- 翻譯: X 平台正在試點一項允許 AI 聊天機器人生成社群筆記的計畫。
📝 Community Notes (n.)
- 社群筆記
- 例句: Community Notes is a Twitter-era feature that Elon Musk has expanded.
- 翻譯: 社群筆記是 Twitter 時代的功能，Elon Musk 在他擁有的服務 (現在稱為 X) 下進行了擴展。
📝 fact-checking (n.)
- 事實查核
- 例句: Users who are part of this fact-checking program can contribute comments.
- 翻譯: 參與此事實查核計畫的使用者可以貢獻評論。
📝 consensus (n.)
- 共識
- 例句: Notes become public when they achieve consensus between groups.
- 翻譯: 當筆記在各群體之間達成共識時，它們就會公開。
📝 vetting process (n.)
- 審核流程
- 例句: Any note that an AI submits will go through the same vetting process to encourage accuracy.
- 翻譯: 任何 AI 提交的筆記都將通過相同的審核流程，以鼓勵準確性。
📝 hallucinate (v.)
- 產生幻覺、虛構
- 例句: The use of AI in fact-checking seems dubious, given how common it is for AIs to hallucinate.
- 翻譯: 鑑於 AI 經常會產生幻覺，在事實查核中使用 AI 似乎令人懷疑。
📝 sycophantic (adj.)
- 諂媚的、奉承的
- 例句: OpenAI’s ChatGPT, for example, recently experienced issues with a model being overly sycophantic.
- 翻譯: 例如，OpenAI 的 ChatGPT 最近遇到了一個模型過於諂媚的問題。
✍️【文法與句型】
📝 be able to
- 說明: 表示有能力或被允許做某事。
- 翻譯: 能夠、可以
- 例句: especially since users will be able to embed LLMs from third parties.
- 翻譯: 尤其是因為使用者將能夠嵌入來自第三方的 LLM。
📝 It remains to be seen if...
- 說明: 表示某事物的結果或影響尚未可知，需要時間觀察。
- 翻譯: 還有待觀察...、...是否...仍有待觀察
- 例句: But it remains to be seen if the use of AI chatbots as fact-checkers will prove helpful or harmful.
- 翻譯: 但是，使用 AI 聊天機器人作為事實查核工具是否有幫助或有害仍有待觀察。
📖【全文與翻譯】
The social platform X will pilot a feature that allows AI chatbots to generate Community Notes.
社交平台 X 將試點一項允許 AI 聊天機器人生成社群筆記的功能。
Community Notes is a Twitter-era feature that Elon Musk has expanded under his ownership of the service, now called X.
社群筆記是 Twitter 時代的功能，Elon Musk 在他擁有的服務（現在稱為 X）下進行了擴展。
Users who are part of this fact-checking program can contribute comments that add context to certain posts, which are then checked by other users before they appear attached to a post.
參與此事實查核計畫的使用者可以貢獻評論，為某些貼文添加背景資訊，這些評論在附加到貼文之前會經過其他使用者的檢查。
A Community Note may appear, for example, on a post of an AI-generated video that is not clear about its synthetic origins, or as an addendum to a misleading post from a politician.
例如，社群筆記可能會出現在一個沒有明確說明其合成來源的 AI 生成影片的貼文上，或者作為政治人物誤導性貼文的附錄。
Notes become public when they achieve consensus between groups that have historically disagreed on past ratings.
當筆記在歷史上對過去評級存在分歧的群體之間達成共識時，它們就會公開。
Community Notes have been successful enough on X to inspire Meta, TikTok, and YouTube to pursue similar initiatives
社群筆記在 X 平台上非常成功，以至於啟發了 Meta、TikTok 和 YouTube 追求類似的計畫。
Meta eliminated its third-party fact-checking programs altogether in exchange for this low-cost, community-sourced labor.
Meta 已經完全取消了其第三方事實查核計畫，以換取這種低成本、社群來源的勞動力。
But it remains to be seen if the use of AI chatbots as fact-checkers will prove helpful or harmful.
但是，使用 AI 聊天機器人作為事實查核工具是否有幫助或有害仍有待觀察。
These AI notes can be generated using X’s Grok or by using other AI tools and connecting them to X via an API.
這些 AI 筆記可以使用 X 平台的 Grok 生成，或者透過其他 AI 工具並將其連接到 X 平台的 API 生成。
Any note that an AI submits will be treated the same as a note submitted by a person, which means that it will go through the same vetting process to encourage accuracy.
任何 AI 提交的筆記都將與人提交的筆記受到相同的待遇，這意味著它將通過相同的審核流程，以鼓勵準確性。
The use of AI in fact-checking seems dubious, given how common it is for AIs to hallucinate, or make up context that is not based in reality.
鑑於 AI 經常會產生幻覺，或者編造不基於現實的背景資訊，在事實查核中使用 AI 似乎令人懷疑。
According to a paper published this week by researchers working on X Community Notes, it is recommended that humans and LLMs work in tandem.
根據 X 社群筆記研究人員本週發表的一篇論文，建議人類和 LLM 協同工作。
Human feedback can enhance AI note generation through reinforcement learning, with human note raters remaining as a final check before notes are published.
人類的回饋可以透過強化學習來增強 AI 筆記的生成，並且在筆記發布之前，人類評分者仍然是最後的檢查。
“The goal is not to create an AI assistant that tells users what to think, but to build an ecosystem that empowers humans to think more critically and understand the world better,” the paper says.
該論文表示：「目標不是創造一個告訴使用者該怎麼想的 AI 助手，而是建立一個生態系統，使人類能夠更批判性地思考並更好地理解世界。」
“LLMs and humans can work together in a virtuous loop.”
「LLM 和人類可以在一個良性循環中協同工作。」
Even with human checks, there is still a risk to relying too heavily on AI, especially since users will be able to embed LLMs from third parties.
即使有人工檢查，過度依賴 AI 仍然存在風險，尤其是因為使用者將能夠嵌入來自第三方的 LLM。
OpenAI’s ChatGPT, for example, recently experienced issues with a model being overly sycophantic.
例如，OpenAI 的 ChatGPT 最近遇到了一個模型過於諂媚的問題。
If an LLM prioritizes “helpfulness” over accurately completing a fact-check, then the AI-generated comments may end up being flat out inaccurate.
如果 LLM 將「有幫助」置於準確完成事實查核之上，那麼 AI 生成的評論最終可能會完全不準確。
There’s also concern that human raters will be overloaded by the amount of AI-generated comments, lowering their motivation to adequately complete this volunteer work.
還有人擔心人類評分者會因 AI 生成的評論數量過多而感到負擔過重，從而降低他們充分完成這項志願工作的動機。
Users shouldn’t expect to see AI-generated Community Notes yet — X plans to test these AI contributions for a few weeks before rolling them out more broadly if they’re successful.
使用者不應期望立即看到 AI 生成的社群筆記 — 如果成功，X 平台計畫在更廣泛地推出這些 AI 貢獻之前，先測試幾週。
🔗【資料來源】
文章連結：<https://techcrunch.com/2025/07/01/x-is-piloting-a-program-that-lets-ai-chatbots-generate-community-notes/>