(wrote up in https://www.latent.space/i/139368545/the-concept-of-low-back... - but ironically repeating something somebody else said online is kinda what i'm willingly participating in, and it's unclear why human-origin tokens should be that much higher signal than ai-origin ones)
https://www.gally.net/miscellaneous/hn-em-dash-user-leaderbo...
the only place I've ever had any issue with AI content is r/chess, where people love to ask ChatGPT a question and then post the answer as if they wrote it, half the time seemingly innocently, which, call me racist, but I suspect is mostly due to the influence of the large and young Indian contingent. otherwise I really don't understand where the issue lies. follow the exact same rules you do for avoiding SEO spam and you will be fine
All AI is doing is making it harder to know what is good information and what is slop, because it obscures the source, or people ignore the source links.
Plus other sites that link to the content could also give away it's date of creation, which is out of the control of the AI content.
I believe I learned about it through HN, and it was this blog post: https://hallofdreams.org/posts/physicsforums/
It kind of reminds me of why some people really covet older accounts when they are trying to do a social engineering attack.
None of these documents were actually published on the web by then, incl., a Watergate PDF bearing date of Nov 21, 1974 - almost 20 years before PDF format got released. Of course, WWW itself started in 1991.
Google Search's date filter is useful for finding documents about historical topics, but unreliable for proving when information actually became publicly available online.
Every corner of the Internet now screaming about AI generated slop, whenever a single pixel doesn't line up.
It's just another generation of technology. And however much nobody might like it, it is here to stay. Same thing happened with airbrushing, and photoshop, and the Internet in general.
Remember that a year or two ago, people were saying something similar about NFTs —that they were the future of sharing content online and we should all get used to it. Now, they still might exist, it's true, but they're much less pervasive and annoying than they once were.
Point still stands. It’s not going anywhere. And the literal hate and pure vitriol I’ve seen towards people on social media, even when they say “oh yeah; this is AI”, is unbelievable.
So many online groups have just become toxic shitholes because someone once or twice a week posts something AI generated
Also, maybe consider why people are upset about being consistently and sneakily lied to about whether or not an actual human wrote something. What's more likely: that everyone who's angry is wrong, or that you're misunderstanding why they're upset?
And that's a hood thing because I much as I like LLMs as a technology, I really don't want people blindly copy-pasting stuff from it without thinking.
I don't think anyone seriously believes the technology will categorically stop being used anytime soon. But then again we still keep using tech thats 50+ years old as it is.
Firstly: I sent one message, and it doesn't have a commercial advertisement in it, so not spam at all.
Secondly: The comment I was replying to, didn't specify that it was pre-ChatGPT, and it is not specified on the page that was linked to either.
Lastly: Sorry you are butthurt.