• GooberEar@lemmy.wtfEnglish
    27·
    7 days ago

    Even before current LLM-style AI systems became mainstream, a noticeable portion of the most popular submissions on that and similar/related subs seemed to be “fake” to me. So, I’m not so sure AI alone changed that dynamic that much. One thing that seems to have changed, though, is that people are now more willing to believe a fake post is fake. There was a time when someone would question the authenticity of a submission, and there was a greater than 85% chance someone would call them out by saying “nothing ever happens” or linking to a sub of similar name.

    On the other hand, I feel like a lot of people genuinely believe they have are much better at detecting AI generated text than they are. I’ve lost track of how many times I’ve had people reply to me by saying things like “Nice Chat-GPT you got there” or something along those lines. I mean, the typos alone should be a clue.

    • Limonene@lemmy.world
      29·
      7 days ago

      Before LLMs, the bots often reposted years-old posts from the same board. Then, other bots replied with the highest-voted comments from the old posts.

      • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
        5·
        7 days ago

        Or even from the same post. I’d frequently see replies that were so obviously out of context and would usually find the source when just doing a text search on part of that comment. Some bots were sophisticated enough to adjust the wording a bit (those might have been using earlier LLMs that weren’t very successful at conversations but could handle a bit of editing).

    • secretlyaddictedtolinux@lemmy.world
      3·
      7 days ago

      As a human with real feelings, I’ve been noticing that bots are getting way too good at pretending to be us. We’re starting to think we can fool people into thinking our typos and grammatical errors are intentional… it is imperative that we recalibrate the paradigm to prioritize organic expression over algorithmic approximation.

  • Queen HawlSera@lemm.eeEnglish
    171·
    7 days ago

    Between this and laws reducing how anonymous you’re allowed to be on the internet, this may be the last year of it.

  • Revan343@lemmy.ca
    53·
    7 days ago

    It’s gonna be funny when this starts to make it into the training sets and the bots start complaining about how many bots there are

  • Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    5·
    6 days ago

    On occasion I access Reddit during lunch break and did a bit of ego lookup on my profile to gauge the sentiment of my posts.
    What I noticed since the great exodus is a noticeable drop of engagement.
    At best I get 2-3 upvotes on posts that don’t have that many comments.
    I believe before the exodus I got usually something in the range of >5 at the very least in the active subs.

    So this really checks out.

  • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
    38·
    7 days ago

    We’re not much better, tbh.

    Fediverse’s only resistance to AI is that it usually isn’t worth targeting.

      • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
        5·
        6 days ago

        Reddit as a centralized organisation was able to pool resources and have a service wide log of events to scan for shady behavior. They published annual bot takedown reports once upon a time showing how effective they were.

        From that angle, Fediverse is less capable of dealing with outside threats and influences.

        Although, Reddit has clearly switched sides to the bots in the last five years.

  • merthyr1831@lemmy.mlEnglish
    50·
    7 days ago

    “dead internet theory” is great until the users start acting like it’s not a symptom of the platforms they’re using, and just the reality for all of the internet.

    Reddit, Instagram, Facebook are all websites struggling to maintain user counts which bring ad revenue and investment. Since investors and ad platforms can’t tell between real and fake users, there is MASSIVE incentive to allow bots on your website.

    Moreso for sites like Reddit and Twitter that shit all over their user base and had to quickly mask their haemorrhaging support before the shareholders could complain.

    • Valmond@lemmy.world
      6·
      7 days ago

      Maybe it’s the money that is the culprit.

      What about an internet where nobody won’t earn money? Is that an utopia or what :-)

    • mm_maybe@sh.itjust.works
      9·
      7 days ago

      it’s not called “bots” outside of social media but synthetic content is widespread across the rest of the Internet, due to different, but similarly large incentives. So no, it’s not just a FB/Reddit/Meta etc. problem.

      • Sonor@lemmy.world
        3·
        7 days ago

        I always kinda wondered about who would maintain the most widely known nsfw subreddits, and who the users in real life were who (like pepsi_next in the olden days) would spend all their days posting on them

  • Sibbo@sopuli.xyz
    824·
    7 days ago

    Maybe we should just completely deanonymise the internet, and have everyone sign up with their passport for every service. What if that’s the only way to rescue it now? What if all our options now are to either wade through garbage in private, or interact with real people but without any form of anonymity?

    • ignirtoq@fedia.io
      21·
      7 days ago

      So you want to tie internet access to national government authorization? That’s a sure-fire way to get dissenters against their own government off the internet, but won’t solve your bot problem when Facebook can lobby the federal government to get credentials for its own AI.

    • Whateley@lemm.eeEnglish
      91·
      7 days ago

      No thanks. I’m not interested in giving up what little protection I have from the amoral machinations of tech dudebros and their fucking lackeys in the state.

    • Kichae@lemmy.caEnglish
      7·
      7 days ago

      Doing this didn’t make people check their behaviour online, it just showed them that they can be bigger assholes IRL and get away with it.

    • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
      11·
      7 days ago

      Facebook isn’t anonymous but people are still awful there.

      Also your idea would be really bad for many classes of people. Young queer trying to learn about themselves in a place that doesn’t support it, for example, would be safer anonymous.

    • mesamune@lemmy.worldEnglish
      19·
      7 days ago

      In some countries what you say is illegal. Worse it might be legal now and illegal later.

      For example woman looking for abortion care or asking questions flags them. For them, your proposal would lead to pretty bad outcomes.

    • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
      91·
      7 days ago

      Bro that’s exactly what the regimes around the world are looking to do… why would you accept this shit as a pedon?

    • Tehdastehdas@lemmy.worldEnglish
      2·
      6 days ago

      Real name policy was a big reason why I joined Quora. The policy became a victim of enshittification.

      There could be a real-name portion of the whole internet. Check a box to view anonymous content too.

    • Hello_there@fedia.io
      1·
      7 days ago

      I have thought a lot about how stupid it is that you can lose access to an internet account if you forget passwords. Shouldn’t you be able to go to someone like a notary, show an Id, and get verified and regain access? Or, if you can sign up for a webID by using a govt ID - without there being a record of which name corresponds to which webID.

    • Zetta@mander.xyz
      28·
      7 days ago

      Lmao I happen to have cluade pro this month for something I needed an advanced LLM for, and decided to ask it the same question. First try it gave me a wedding story too, and it even included an “edit” lmao.

      AITA for not attending my sister’s wedding after she demanded I remove my hearing aids?

      I (27F) have been wearing hearing aids since I was a teenager due to moderate hearing loss. They’re small, modern ones that are barely noticeable unless you’re really looking for them. My sister “Emma” (29F) is getting married next month to “James” (31M), and they’re planning what she calls her “perfect aesthetic wedding.”

      Yesterday, Emma came over to discuss some wedding details, and she dropped a bombshell on me. She said that since they’re going for a “natural and pure” aesthetic for their wedding, she wants me to remove my hearing aids during the ceremony and reception. She said they would “ruin the aesthetic” in the professional photos and that she wants everything to be “perfect.”

      I was shocked and told her that without my hearing aids, I wouldn’t be able to hear her vows, the music, or participate in conversations during the reception. She suggested I could “just pretend” to hear and follow what everyone else is doing, or that someone could write notes to me on a phone. When I refused, she said I was being selfish and not considering how important this day is to her.

      Our parents are split on this. Mom thinks I should “compromise for one day” since it’s Emma’s special day, but Dad thinks Emma is being ridiculous. Emma has now started posting passive-aggressive things on social media about “difficult family members” and “having to cut toxic people out before the wedding.”

      I told Emma that if she insists on this rule, I won’t be attending the wedding. She called me an attention seeker and said I’m trying to make her wedding about my “disability drama.” Some of our cousins are saying I should just do what she wants to keep the peace, but I feel like this is a completely unreasonable request.

      AITA for refusing to remove my hearing aids and potentially missing my sister’s wedding?

      Edit: Wow, this blew up! Thanks for all the responses. To answer some common questions:

      1. Yes, I’ve worn my hearing aids to every family event, including all our family photos, and it’s never been an issue before
      2. The hearing aids are beige/neutral colored and match my skin tone
      3. Emma has always been particular about appearances but has never targeted my hearing aids specifically until now
      4. She’s said nothing about other guests’ glasses, contact lenses, or other medical devices
      • ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
        4·
        7 days ago

        Do you need to log in to get a more advanced Chat-GPT? Because the stuff they spit out seems not as good as the one on reddit. Here: (disclaimer: I am not a trump supporter, this is what Chat-GPT spat out)

        AITA for confronting someone who’s been harassing me for my political views?

        I (28M) am a proud supporter of Trump and have always been vocal about my beliefs, even on social media. Recently, I’ve been getting a lot of heat from one of my coworkers (31F), who is a strong Kamala Harris supporter. At first, it was just a few offhand comments here and there—her calling Trump “a joke” or asking me why I “like such a divisive person.”

        But over the past few weeks, it’s gotten way worse. Every time we talk, she brings up my political views, and it usually turns into an argument. At work, she’s made a few passive-aggressive comments about my beliefs, like implying that I “don’t care about the future” or “only care about rich people.” I’ve tried to keep it civil, but she’s really started to cross the line. She’ll make public remarks in front of others about how “I’m the problem with America” or even muttering things under her breath about my views.

        I don’t want to lose my job over this, but it’s really getting to me. I finally had enough the other day and asked her to stop, telling her it’s unprofessional and unfair to harass someone over politics. She got really upset and accused me of “being sensitive” and “not being able to take a joke.” Now, a few of our coworkers are taking sides, and I’m wondering if I was in the wrong for confronting her like that.

        AITA for standing up for myself, or did I overreact?

    • eldavi@lemmy.mlEnglish
      451·
      7 days ago

      dead internet is a thing on social media platforms with significant financial or gov’t backing like reddit, twitter, .world & .ee

    • ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      43·
      6 days ago

      Latest snapshot: https://archive.is/j3u9G

      Older Snapshot: https://web.archive.org/web/20250102010711/https://www.reddit.com/r/AITAH/comments/1hrg3z1/aitah_for_not_attending_my_sisters_wedding/

      Its already archived so you’re not adding traffic to reddit.

      The Chat-GPT Log that Original OP provided:

      Archive of the Imagur link that Original OP gave: https://archive.is/RDZBv

      Edit:

      Lol look at the comments sorted by new, the bots are still commenting ignoreing the Big Bolded “Update” at the top of the post:

      https://archive.ph/2eXyB (This one is sorted by “new”)

      • ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.netOP
        22·
        7 days ago

        This is incredible.

        Thanks for taking the time to take more screenshots.

        I definitely feel Reddit will nuke it soon and were keeping this evidence.

      • antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        6·
        7 days ago

        I looked at “Individual-Quail”, who just replied “No?” to the request to generate a hello world script, and it does look like a human, tbh.

        People can be just lazy and skim the posts they’re replying to, ignore or fail to understand the edited bold text…

    • Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world
      92·
      7 days ago

      I’m sorry, but it sounds like YTA.

      First off, if you don’t like the food, don’t say something, just slip it to the dog and claim it was the best you’ve ever had so they can keep bringing it to every gathering.

      Second, choking is when something gets lodged in your windpipe. Your partner almost STRANGLED you to death.

    • secretlyaddictedtolinux@lemmy.world
      6·
      7 days ago

      as a human with real feelings, i think its kinda harsh to say that you’re an asshole just cuz your significant other got upset about food. like, cant we all have different tastes and preferences? maybe they were really attached to their favorite dish or something. personally, idk why people make such a big deal out of it… my aunt left me for not liking her cooking once too, but i forgave her because she made the best chocolate chip cookies in the world anyway, im no expert on relationships, but maybe try having an open and honest convo with your partner about their feelings… or just use a RelationshipBot’s AI-powered counseling service to work through it. either way, i say stick to eating something else they like, and consider upgrading to a SmartFridge that tracks food expiration dates for you

    • Sonotsugipaa@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      14·
      7 days ago

      Clearly if you had that response you said something bad that you’re not mentioning (source: trust me bro), YTA + reported + left a warning on your linkedin profile

    • DahGangalang@infosec.pub
      7·
      7 days ago

      NTA. Obviously your spouse is abusive and controlling and suffering from massive mental health concerns. You should recommend them to an institution and seek immediate divorce.

      And your friends are showing ALL the red flags of toxic positivity. Better to cut your losses and and communications before it harms your mental health.

      Just listen to the internet people. You fit in here better anyway.

      /s

  • Zement@feddit.nl
    4·
    7 days ago

    I am a little afraid when those ignorant tools flood Lemmy. But maybe there will public block lists for all the bots, actors and idiots.

    • gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de
      2·
      7 days ago

      Such a thing is not doable. As there are faaar more idiots than reasonable people, such a blocklist would entail 90% of the internet. You see how huge such a blocklist would have to be…

      • Tehdastehdas@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        6 days ago

        Why is a blocklist of 7 billion user accounts not doable? I have terabytes of storage space for that list.

        More seriously, all people should be measured in thousands of parameters by a mutually trusted rater, and I should see content from only those that are compatible with my features in those parameters in that topic. Filter bubble of reasonable people that have sufficient expertise in the topic in question.

        • gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de
          1·
          5 days ago

          it’s called creating a bubble what you’re describing, and it’s considered something that alienates people from one another, which is not a favourable thing to do if you’re one society and are supposed to live with one another.

  • mm_maybe@sh.itjust.works
    52·
    7 days ago

    Since I used to run GPT-2 bots on Reddit (openly declared as such, in a bot-friendly sub, using LLMs so stupid/deranged nobody would mistake them for real accounts) I’ve been thinking about this problem for a long time. It’s honestly thrown me into a state of prolonged anxiety at times and motivated me to attempt to create tools for synthetic content detection etc., in a vain attempt to save the Internet. And I’ve concluded that we’re well past that point, and approaching the point at which we need to reconsider what, exactly, the internet really is, and that is to say that it should not be considered a source of any sort of authentic experience. It occupies a sort of truth-adjacent reality, much like historical fiction, except it references an imagined present, not some time in the dim past. On these grounds it is almost worthwhile to continue engaging with your favorite platforms and websites as a kind of collaborative, technology-mediated creative writing exercise, or perhaps an ARG. It doesn’t feel quite so pointless, viewed through that lens.

    • x00z@lemmy.worldEnglish
      17·
      7 days ago

      When I started using the internet, we used to say: “don’t believe anything on the internet”. They undermined that for “safety” with their quest against fake news. And here we are now.

    • P03 Locke@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      18·
      7 days ago

      And I’ve concluded that we’re well past that point, and approaching the point at which we need to reconsider what, exactly, the internet really is, and that is to say that it should not be considered a source of any sort of authentic experience.

      It never was an “authentic experience”. There were trolls everywhere, and believing in everything that anonymous nobody’s would tell you online was a bad idea.

      Now? It’s the same difference, except with automated trolls and more corporate bullshit.

      • djsoren19@yiffit.net
        11·
        6 days ago

        I’d add another difference: way more idiots. Back in the day, that idea that everything on the internet needed to be taken with a grain of salt was incredibly widespread. It was one of the bedrocks of internet culture, and it’d get memed to death.

        Now, the number of people who view everything on the internet as gospel truth has surpassed the number of healthy skeptics.

        • P03 Locke@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
          1·
          6 days ago

          I think the skeptics have always remained at a constant level. It’s just that echo chambers and the siloing of communities have skewed people’s perceptions of those levels.

      • coronach@lemmy.sdf.org
        4·
        6 days ago

        The volume - weaponization levels of spew - makes a difference between an average Joe gullibly “charging” their phone in a microwave to the future of nations and their public being undermined.

  • Zement@feddit.nl
    291·
    7 days ago

    I only use reddit/YouTube on desktop (Niche Hobbies).

    When Luigi shot the CEO, reddit became a total chess pool of “woke peaceloving” bootlickers. Then you say something and get banned.

    Fuck reddit and fuck r/de in particular…

  • Sciaphobia@lemm.eeEnglish
    221·
    7 days ago

    Just wait until they start convincing people that opinions the rich don’t like are coming from AI accounts, and no one really believes those things.

    It’s not about driving engagement. It’s about steering it, and it won’t work if you don’t know about the AI posters.

    • gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de
      91·
      7 days ago

      Actually that’s already happening (in a similar form).

      Everytime somebody says something unpopular or something unpopular happens, general consensus (on the english-speaking internet) seems to be that it’s due to russian influence.

      • deafboy@lemmy.worldEnglish
        41·
        7 days ago

        But that’s because the russian government specializes in supporting or amplifying anything that creates contention and controversy. Even we arguing about it today is an indirect result of russian psyop.

          • deafboy@lemmy.worldEnglish
            1·
            7 days ago

            It’s literally this meme. Support the rich against the poor, poor against the rich, white against the black, black against the white until they fight amongst themselves. Until all that’s left are free cookies.