It is unclear how he is doing today - his family consistently protects his privacy. Despite the massive interest of many media houses, no more interviews with the Formula 1 legend have been permitted.
Continue reading: Schumacher family plans legal action over fake AI quotes: ESPNAll the more surprising is the cover of the current issue of the magazine “Die Aktuelle”. It announces an interview with Michael Schumacher and advertises with the lines “The first interview!” and “World sensation!
However, the expectations raised by the magazine itself are by no means fulfilled. Buyers look in vain for a real interview with the record-breaking Formula 1 world champion in the magazine. Behind the supposedly exclusive interview is a fake interview, the answers come from an artificial intelligence.
The online portal “Übermedien”, a magazine for media criticism, first reported on the deceptive reporting, founder Boris Rosenkranz speaks in his article of a “remarkable impudence, even for ‘Die Aktuelle’”.
Critics complain that the fake is not adequately explained in the magazine itself. Statements by the alleged Michael Schumacher are printed as quotes, a symbol of “c.ai” - the AI “character.ai” that was presumably used here - is next to Schumacher’s name.
Which source is actually used remains a secret. “The interview was on the internet. On a site that has to do with artificial intelligence, AI for short,” the paper writes.
“There are indeed internet sites where you can have conversations with celebrities. But the answers are provided by artificial intelligence. But how does this AI know the personal backgrounds? About marriage, children and illnesses? Someone must have entered the information - like in Wikipedia - on the internet. Was it really Schumi himself who typed in the info from his sickbed?” it says. “In any case, the answers sound deceptively real!”, the editorial team finds.
Michael Schumacher’s fans obviously have a different opinion. On the internet, they make no secret of their displeasure: “Simply disgusting,” says one user, while another finds the procedure “unbelievably unscrupulous”.
