They discovered that, in the last glacial period, Earth experienced its highest CO2 increase: 14 parts per million in just 55 years. Not, our planet experiences that increase every five years.

I have been noticing silly typos all over the place in articles for the last few years, but have no memory of those being common in the past. I guess editors proofreading articles isn't really a thing anymore?

[–] kandoh@reddthat.com 23 points 4 months ago

The editors are all gone now. Look at newspapers. No one is going to pay someone to check the work of the other guy you're paying for that work, that's like paying twice for the same job.

[–] paddirn@lemmy.world 19 points 4 months ago (1 children)

It’s probably mostly AI-driven now. It sees the word ‘Not’ is spelled correctly, so it’s good to go.

[–] snooggums@midwest.social 15 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Looks more like relying on spellcheck than AI.

[–] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 9 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Spell check was the first LLM.

[–] Atelopus-zeteki@kbin.run 3 points 4 months ago

By that standard, I'm pretty sure dictionaries were the first LLM. :-D

[–] Bipta@kbin.social 14 points 4 months ago

Everyone fired their editors in 2008.

[–] entropicdrift@lemmy.sdf.org 6 points 4 months ago

I just read this as a "not" joke. As in, "yeah that was the fastest ever CO2 increase in earth's history. Not"

[–] PrinceWith999Enemies@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

I’m going to hazard a guess it’s a combination of falling budget and an over reliance on autocorrect. If it’s like other industries, they’re trying to get more articles out with fewer people.

I know that I often have an atrocious number of typos - but some are entirely the fault of autocorrect either changing a correct word to something else or correcting a typo to a word that makes no sense in the context of the sentence. I’m hoping that the next generation will improve this.

If anything a now - not typo at least indicates that it was written by a human. LLM errors generally don’t involve that sort of thing.

[–] obinice@lemmy.world 17 points 4 months ago (2 children)

They discovered that, in the last glacial period, Earth experienced its highest CO2 increase: 14 parts per million in just 55 years. Not, our planet experiences that increase every five years.

I've been reading this and just can't get my head around the last bit. What are they trying to say? O.o

[–] ThatWeirdGuy1001@lemmy.world 33 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

An increase that used to take 55 years now takes 5.

It's a typo. It's supposed to be "now" instead of "not"

[–] billwashere@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago

Thank you… the world makes sense again. I thought I was stroking out.

[–] MightBeAlpharius@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago

It's either a typo, or a lot or sass for a PopSci article.

"Look at this huge, unparalleled rise in carbon levels millions of years ago, it's so huge... Psych! We do that every five years! Buckle in, buckaroo, things are about to get bad!"

[–] SoupBrick@pawb.social 9 points 4 months ago

But we haven't seen what happens when we ignore it yet! It could just become cotton candy!

[–] MonkderDritte@feddit.de 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

climate destruction

Shouldn't have expecteted less with "ever" in the title.

[–] cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 4 months ago

i read the title as "a 50,000 year old block of ice pants" at first.

[–] seven_phone@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago (2 children)

I only skimmed this article but is it trying to bring home the seriousness of and need to reverse man-made global warming by citing an entirely natural example.

[–] baronvonj@lemmy.world 7 points 4 months ago

Based on other comments the operative comparison is the previous worst case took 55 years to build up the level of CO2 that now only takes 5 years.