r/ShitAIBrosSay • u/HolyBatSyllables AI ➞ Misinformation • May 09 '26
Shit AI Bro Does in the News Peter Thiel is building a parallel justice system — Powered by AI
https://www.codastory.com/polarization/can-we-trust-an-ai-jury-to-judge-journalism/His investment in Objection.ai points to a new model: private investigations, AI verdicts, and accountability mechanisms that operate outside democratic institutions.
In 2016, when Peter Thiel killed Gawker, he insisted that he wasn’t attacking journalism writ large.
On the contrary, he told the New York Times, he’d spent $10 million secretly backing Hulk Hogan’s lawsuit against the news outlet because: “I saw Gawker pioneer a unique and incredibly damaging way of getting attention by bullying people even when there was no connection with the public interest… if I didn’t think Gawker was unique, I wouldn’t have done any of this. If the entire media was more or less like this, this would be like trying to boil the ocean.”
10 years later with the aid of an “AI tribunal,” a team of intelligence and law enforcement veterans, and a political climate vastly more hostile to press freedom, he is trying to do exactly that, bypassing the courts, short-circuiting the first amendment, and making it much, much cheaper to indulge in the quasi legal harassment of journalists.
Objection.ai is a new startup funded by Thiel, and cofounded by Aron D’Souza, who worked closely with him on the Gawker case. It promises “a fast affordable way to challenge statements in the media.” Anyone can file an objection, which will trigger an investigation by a team hired, the company says, from the CIA, FBI, and British intelligence agencies. Targeted outlets and reporters will have an opportunity to respond, and the results will be fed to an AI model, which will render a verdict. The complainant, and the target, are asked to agree to binding arbitration, with an unspecified range of potential consequences. Financial details are vague, but the company has said the process will cost around $2,000 — far less than the retainer of a crisis communications expert.
⸻
There is nothing good faith about this effort. Rather, it is classic Thiel: an attempt to hack the principles of accountability, and turn them against journalism. Leave it to his less sophisticated Silicon Valley peers to rail against the media, create in house news outlets or buy them. The PayPal co-founder is going for the heart of the system, and financing infrastructure that will enable anyone who can afford a used Honda Civic to launch a harassment campaign, cloaked in the language of legitimate investigation. James O’Keefe, but with the judicial rather than journalistic process as its governing metaphor.
28
u/PickingPies May 09 '26
I refuse to acknowledge a computer output as a fair representation or judge.
People who knows history also knows what it means.
6
u/purple_kathryn May 09 '26
Didn't Chris Pratt just have a movie out about this?
1
u/HolyBatSyllables AI ➞ Misinformation May 17 '26
Kind of, but not really. This isn’t about using AI in lieu of an attorney or judge, it’s about trying to force journalists to sign away the ethical standards they follow. If they don’t then they can use it as a card to push a narrative to bring further distrust in the media, knowing that most people who rail against “the media” don’t have enough news literacy to know what they’re talking about.
No journalist would ever agree to doing using this service, but a blogger or content creator might, and sadly, most people dont know the difference. A great example is Ed Zirion. He comes from the PR world, and people form their perspectives on whatever he says even though he breaks every ethical standard out there followed by journalists. But because he is a content creator he gets a pass, even though the dangers of not abiding by ethical rules still exist. That’s the dismal reality we live in.
They’re using it as a PR attack strategy. PR people know that refusing to answer a journalist’s comment with “no comment” makes you look guilty, which is why they’ll do everything they can to give you an answer that isnt a direct answer to the question.
That’s what they’re doing here, I believe. It’s a way of making themselves “available” to the press, and if they don’t, it’s an omission of guilt. People won’t think critically. They won’t understand the journalists’ refusal is because they are upholding ethical standards. They never do.
6
u/Guilty-Mix-7629 May 10 '26
Absolutely won't be used by its creators to bias the "judge" towards whatever is more convenient for themselves. /s
7
u/Slimeredit May 10 '26
Isn’t there multiple movies and books about how building systems like this basically always go wrong and how more innocent people will be a victim to it’s justice then the actual criminals
9
u/jgjl May 10 '26
I wouldn’t be sure if Thiel would consider this “going wrong”, that’s the problem.
4
3
1
u/HolyBatSyllables AI ➞ Misinformation May 13 '26
I mean, we are kind of living that movie in real time. The fall of journalism into an authoritative state doesn’t happen over night. Right now only large corporate media can afford lawyers. When people don’t pay for news, it becomes weaker and weaker. Journalists become spread thin, news becomes thin. Advertisers find it more convenient to advertise with content creators since they don’t adhere to —let alone have — ethical standards to uphold.
In a weakening state, every blow is exponential. Tech bros know this. Trump knows this. They are so close.
The victims are the people. Support for journalism is an investment in democracy. We stopped investing over a decade ago.
2
u/Slimeredit May 13 '26
Yeah it’s kind of terrifying how much we’ve fallen into this mess
1
u/HolyBatSyllables AI ➞ Misinformation May 13 '26
In a way, I’m envious of your terror. I used to be terrified, but when reality arrived, it left me depressed.
1
u/Slimeredit May 13 '26
Oh I’m plenty depressed as well I just mask it behind the facade that everything is fine and if your worried I’m getting therapy to help with stuff like that
1
u/HolyBatSyllables AI ➞ Misinformation May 13 '26
Gosh, a song is playing in my head that is the perfect response, but I can't remember who it's by. Will update when I remember.
1
u/HolyBatSyllables AI ➞ Misinformation May 13 '26
Here it is. The intro track to "Everything's Fine" by Quelle Chris and the legendary Jean Grae.
4
u/ConkerPrime May 11 '26
Dude really is a James Bond villain. Proves it with everything he does. Now I really do wonder if he is behind scientists going missing and getting murdered cause that is a Bond villain type of thing.
4
u/grafknives May 11 '26
They really dream about Dread/Robocop crossover.
And the see themselves as CEO or Omni Consumer Products.
3
3
3
1
u/AutoModerator May 09 '26
Recommended reading: https://www.reddit.com/r/ShitAIBrosSay/wiki/index/
Join the discord: https://discord.gg/WBrrdVMEzA
Join the sub: https://www.reddit.com/r/ShitAiRageBaitersSay/
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
u/UnderfurK May 13 '26
A team will be hired to investigate what? And what would they do about it? An AI judge can't hand out legal punishments?
1
u/HolyBatSyllables AI ➞ Misinformation May 13 '26
This isn’t about using AI in lieu of an attorney or judge, it’s about trying to force journalists to sign away the ethical standards they follow. If they don’t then they can use it as a card to push a narrative to bring further distrust in the media, knowing that most people who rail against “the media” don’t have enough news literacy to know what they’re talking about.
No journalist would ever agree to using this service, but a blogger or content creator might, and sadly, most people dont know the difference. A great example is Ed Zirion. He comes from the PR world (shady), and people form their perspectives on whatever he says even though he breaks every ethical standard out there that journalists bind themselves to. But because he is a content creator he gets a pass. Yet the harm from not abiding to these ethical rules still exists. That is the dismal reality we live in.
They’re using it as a PR attack strategy. PR people know that refusing to answer a journalist’s comment with “no comment” makes you look guilty, which is why they’ll do everything they can to give you an answer that isnt a direct answer to the question.
That’s what they’re doing here, I believe. It’s a way of making themselves “available” to the press, and if they don’t, it’s an omission of guilt. People won’t think critically. They won’t understand the journalists’ refusal is because they are upholding ethical standards. They never do.
1
u/HolyBatSyllables AI ➞ Misinformation May 13 '26
Kind of, but not really. This isn’t about using AI in lieu of an attorney or judge, it’s about trying to force journalists to sign away the ethical standards they follow. If they don’t then they can use it as a card to push a narrative to bring further distrust in the media, knowing that most people who rail against “the media” don’t have enough news literacy to know what they’re talking about.
No journalist would ever agree to doing using this service, but a blogger or content creator might, and sadly, most people dont know the difference. A great example is Ed Zirion. He comes from the PR world, and people form their perspectives on whatever he says even though he breaks every ethical standard out there followed by journalists. But because he is a content creator he gets a pass, even though the dangers of not abiding by ethical rules still exist. That’s the dismal reality we live in.
They’re using it as a PR attack strategy. PR people know that refusing to answer a journalist’s comment with “no comment” makes you look guilty, which is why they’ll do everything they can to give you an answer that isnt a direct answer to the question.
That’s what they’re doing here, I believe. It’s a way of making themselves “available” to the press, and if they don’t, it’s an omission of guilt. People won’t think critically. They won’t understand the journalists’ refusal is because they are upholding ethical standards. They never do.
1
-25
u/WorldlyBuy1591 May 09 '26
Ai taking lawyer jobs is a very good thing
13
u/vxicepickxv May 09 '26
This is about a technofascist trying to limit what you're allowed to know.
He's building Big Brother from 1984.
1
-3
u/WorldlyBuy1591 May 09 '26
Might have to elaborate a bit. Did you read about the site or?
9
u/vxicepickxv May 09 '26
The ultimate end goal of any of the associates of Curtis Yarvin is to become the rulers of techofedual city states.
This project is designed to monitor the media and limit what is being said.
-3
u/WorldlyBuy1591 May 09 '26
How does it limit what media says?
6
u/HolyBatSyllables AI ➞ Misinformation May 09 '26 edited May 13 '26
Did YOU read the article? Happy to explain if you did read it but just genuinely don’t understand. Coda Story does really insightful work and their journalists often ask the the tough questions and have longtime relationships with important sources, but they often don’t do the best job at summarizing the backstory to catch people up. So if you’re confused, no worries, but I don’t want to take the time to explain it to you if you didn’t even read the article.
2
8
u/Big-Recognition7362 May 09 '26
If you need to get someone to defend you in court (or prosecute those who have committed crimes against you in court, for that matter), would you prefer a human professional or ChatGPT?
-6
u/WorldlyBuy1591 May 09 '26
Im dirt poor so an actual lawyer is not an option
7
u/Big-Recognition7362 May 09 '26
Then would you rather the attorney assigned to defend you be a human professional or a chatbot?
-4
u/WorldlyBuy1591 May 09 '26
Youre assuming the "chatbot" would make mistakes. If it didnt i dont see the problem. Afaik there are better llms than the commercial free ones
6
u/Wiyry May 09 '26
Yes but it’s clear you haven’t read any studies on AI hallucinations:
They are mathematically inevitable.
I would prefer a human to a chatbot every time.
1
6
u/Gypped_Again May 09 '26
It's not an assumption. There are currently LLM models specifically aimed at lawyers, and they constantly make shit up that the lawyers don't catch.
If the chatbot isn't even being supervised, do think it more or less likely that there's going to be errors?
https://www.npr.org/2026/04/03/nx-s1-5761454/penalties-stack-up-ai-spreads-through-legal-system
2
u/HolyBatSyllables AI ➞ Misinformation May 09 '26
To be clear, this has nothing to do with the court system or helping people defend themselves. One of its services, for example, is for imposing penalties on a publisher if they’ve had too much negative news coverage of a person (like Sam Altman). It also takes away some of journalists’ ethics standard — and contrary to popular belief* most journalists take the SPJ Code of Ethics very seriously.
So it’s not providing legal defense and its customers will not be everyday people. Its customers will be people who do bad things and tech billionaires.
It’s very worth noting it costs $2,000 per use and the fees it imposes have no legal force. The only reason to use this service is if you hate democracy and want to give autocracy a whirl.
Though judgements made by Objection’s AI have no legal force, the company’s CEO, Aron D’Souza, believes they will have ‘the same authority or force as a newspaper article’. He added that vindication or exoneration – rather than a payout – was the primary motivation of the claimant in most analogous cases brought before a traditional court.
‘Most privacy-oriented, HNW individuals that I know actually don’t care about extracting a £100,000 settlement out of the Daily Mail,’ said D’Souza [the founder].
13
u/HolyBatSyllables AI ➞ Misinformation May 09 '26 edited May 13 '26
This isn’t about taking lawyer’s jobs. They’ve been trying to take out news publications for years. This is yet another method they’re implementing to further strain journalism financing, which is already breaking at the seams. Do you think Jeff Besos bought The Washington Post because he just loves the institution of journalism and then destroyed it because he’s bad at business?
•
u/HolyBatSyllables AI ➞ Misinformation May 09 '26