[HN Gopher] Something exceptionally grim is happening on the Int...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Something exceptionally grim is happening on the Internet
        
       Author : rapnie
       Score  : 51 points
       Date   : 2024-03-21 18:41 UTC (4 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (mastodon.lawprofs.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (mastodon.lawprofs.org)
        
       | barbazoo wrote:
       | That mastodon instance does not seem to be ready for HN
        
         | reaperman wrote:
         | Works fine for me, 10 minutes after this was posted. I'm not
         | sure if this thread unrolled caches responses or not, but if it
         | does maybe those who can't get through can read it here.
         | 
         | https://mastoreader.io/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmastodon.lawprofs....
         | 
         | or
         | 
         | https://unroller.zachmanson.com/tree/https://mastodon.lawpro...
        
       | jacooper wrote:
       | Hugged?
        
       | AlienRobot wrote:
       | It seems the site is down so I typed
       | cache:https://mastodon.lawprofs.org/@jtlg/112052299948819084 on
       | Google and checked the text version. Here's what it says:
       | 
       | >To use the Mastodon web application, please enable JavaScript.
       | Alternatively, try one of the native apps for Mastodon for your
       | platform.
       | 
       | That's very grim indeed.
        
         | jbm wrote:
         | I managed to connect. I don't know how much I can copy, since
         | it's quite a long thread, but here is the first message.
         | 
         | > Something exceptionally grim is happening on the Internet.
         | 
         | > In the last few months, the constant flood of algorithmically
         | generated junk content has kicked into an AI-powered overdrive,
         | and it is cutting a swath of destruction as it overwhelms
         | search engines, filters, and moderation systems
         | 
         | > Call it Gresham's Law 2.0: bad content drives out good.
         | 
         | > I'm starting this thread to document it, because there is a
         | _lot_ happening all at once.
         | 
         | > #greshamslaw20
        
           | AlienRobot wrote:
           | With everything in consideration, I think the real problem
           | are incentives.
           | 
           | When human-created content competes and loses against AI-
           | generated spam, the system is ill-designed.
           | 
           | This is the culmination of algorithms that have rewarded
           | engagement over everything else. Creator platforms look at
           | content made by experts that are high quality and take time
           | to make and effort to consume, and judge it worse than trashy
           | content full of controversial drama pushed every week without
           | research or effort based on arbitrary metrics. Now we've
           | reached the point where the creator is unnecessary and all
           | that matters is engagement.
           | 
           | Creator-less engagement will be the future of the web. A
           | technology that triumphed by connecting people around the
           | world will die connecting you with nobody but an AI that acts
           | as wall and filter between you and the rest of the world.
        
       | MichaelRo wrote:
       | >> In the last few months, the constant flood of algorithmically
       | generated junk content has kicked into an AI-powered overdrive,
       | and it is cutting a swath of destruction as it overwhelms search
       | engines, filters, and moderation systems
       | 
       | Nothing that wasn't happening already since some 15 years or so.
        
         | squidsoup wrote:
         | I think you are massively underestimating how quickly AI
         | generated content is going to dominate the web. This is
         | something new.
        
           | squigz wrote:
           | I don't know. People have been saying quite confidently that
           | "AI" is "going to" "take over" the web since ChatGPT was
           | announced. I live online and my only exposure to AI-generated
           | content (that I recognize, of course, but that's another
           | discussion) has been on purpose - when I look for it, use it
           | myself, or others share what they're doing with it. I guess
           | I'm still waiting for it to take over?
           | 
           | I think what people mean by "the web" is really just the 4-5
           | large social media sites. Those have been utterly filled with
           | spam/scam/fraud for many years, so I fail to see a
           | difference.
        
             | krapp wrote:
             | >I think what people mean by "the web" is really just the
             | 4-5 large social media sites. Those have been utterly
             | filled with spam/scam/fraud for many years, so I fail to
             | see a difference.
             | 
             | No, as the linked thread shows, this is happening
             | everywhere, not just the 4-5 large social media silos.
             | There is another completely separate thread knocking around
             | on HN somewhere about how AI spam is filling up OpenAI's
             | chatbot store, and it's been well documented as a problem
             | with Google image search, Quora, Linkedin and numerous
             | other sites.
             | 
             | It's apparent that you yourself don't notice the problem
             | but that doesn't mean the problem doesn't exist.
        
               | squigz wrote:
               | > It's apparent that you yourself don't notice the
               | problem but that doesn't mean the problem doesn't exist.
               | 
               | Well that's true, but likewise, just because people
               | notice the problem more in their own lives, doesn't mean
               | it's as widespread as some say.
               | 
               | (Neither of these comments are meant to say that this is
               | not a problem - it is - I'm just tired of the crazy-
               | overstated FUD surrounding it all)
        
             | barbazoo wrote:
             | It's hard to know where SEO ends and AI content begins but
             | it's definitely a www phenomenon, not just "4-5 large
             | social media sites".
        
             | bluefirebrand wrote:
             | > when I look for it, use it myself, or others share what
             | they're doing with it. I guess I'm still waiting for it to
             | take over
             | 
             | Dunno if you follow gaming news at all, but AI spam has
             | become the rule if you look for anything on new popular
             | games
             | 
             | If you want to know how to solve a puzzle or compare two
             | characters or something, it is almost guaranteed that you
             | will come across pages of search results that seem like
             | generated content
             | 
             | They are usually wrong, too
        
               | orbital-decay wrote:
               | Current amount of SEO spam is nowhere near the 2007
               | levels, when the entire first page of Google results was
               | your search query with stuff like "xxx", "2007 crack", or
               | "download free" attached to it.
               | 
               |  _> If you want to know how to solve a puzzle or compare
               | two characters or something, it is almost guaranteed that
               | you will come across pages of search results that seem
               | like generated content_
               | 
               | This kind of content was _never_ genuine. It was always
               | low effort trash made to cheat search engines. It was
               | either outsourced to copywriters regurgitating the same
               | content over and over, or automatically generated when
               | possible. Automating it with LLMs simply made it obvious.
               | 
               | Amazon book scams is the age-old tradition at this point,
               | it exists for well over a decade and is a result of
               | Amazon not willing to spend even one cent on manual
               | curation.
               | 
               | OP might have a point, but it's still mostly typical
               | microblogging ragebait with unrelated stuff mixed in.
        
               | klyrs wrote:
               | > This kind of content was never genuine.
               | 
               | Maybe not in your lifetime, but in mine, high-quality
               | game walkthroughs with in-depth statistics were pretty
               | ordinary for even fairly niche games.
        
               | xboxnolifes wrote:
               | > Dunno if you follow gaming news at all, but AI spam has
               | become the rule if you look for anything on new popular
               | games
               | 
               | At least in regards to game articles, this has been my
               | experience for at least a decade. It wasn't AI spam, but
               | it was spam everywhere non-the-less. I'm sure it's even
               | worse now, but it was bad enough even 10 years ago that
               | I've stopped bothering using google to find most game
               | information years ago.
        
           | a_vanderbilt wrote:
           | This was a plot point in the Cyberpunk lore. The Internet got
           | overrun with AI to the point that they had to build a new
           | Internet in parallel for humans, with mega-companies being
           | the stewards of course. In a way, Pondsmith called this
           | decades ago.
        
         | sneed_chucker wrote:
         | "nothing ever happens"
         | 
         | Believe it or not, sometimes things happen.
        
       | ilamont wrote:
       | _" Google is taking action against algorithmically generated
       | spam. The search engine giant just announced upcoming changes,
       | including a revamped spam policy, designed in part to keep AI
       | clickbait out of its search results."_
       | 
       | Even before the AI floodgates were opened, there was a huge
       | problem with ads and SEO-optimized junk written by humans
       | clogging up Google, and pushing the good stuff into the SERP
       | netherworld. People complained for years (including here) with no
       | discernible improvement.
       | 
       | It's one of the reasons HN turned into one of my go-to places for
       | finding the good stuff - obscure blog posts and social media
       | threads and websites that share facts, recollections, opinions,
       | and expert insights that can't be found anywhere else. However,
       | HN and a few other high-quality discovery sites can only go so
       | far in surfacing such content.
       | 
       | Now it looks like Google, Amazon, and other Lords of the Internet
       | are going to cause further damage with inevitable false positives
       | as "AI spam detection" is unleashed on the Internet. Of course,
       | there will be no recourse other than victims pleading for human
       | intervention on a forum like this or hoping it goes viral on
       | social media.
        
       | ChrisArchitect wrote:
       | Did this collection of links warrant a post? See the many
       | discussions about AI-infiltration and "Dead Internet Theory"
       | around here:
       | 
       |  _The AI bullshit singularity_
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39422528
       | 
       |  _The internet feels fake now. It 's all just staged videos and
       | marketing_
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39551035
       | 
       |  _X becoming a 'ghost town' of bots as AI-generated spam content
       | floods internet_
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39535310
       | 
       |  _The Internet Is Full of AI Dogshit_
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38952526
        
       | araes wrote:
       | Some of the articles linked, are basically issues I was already
       | aware of (such as all product review sites are turning into copy-
       | pasta).
       | 
       | I at least have sympathy for the folks at:
       | https://housefresh.com/david-vs-digital-goliaths/
       | 
       | However, mostly Google's included comment is personally
       | hilarious. The weird craziness some people at Google must have to
       | deal with.
       | 
       | > Lily Ray, 'when we told our client, they said "that's literally
       | not going to be possible"'
       | 
       | > Google, 'Genuinely curious, what's impossible in guidance like
       | "discuss benefits and drawbacks based on your own research"'
        
         | dpifke wrote:
         | I somehow missed that article when it first appeared on HN[0],
         | thanks for linking to it!
         | 
         | Surprised to "^F FTC" the article and comments, and not find
         | any mention of the Federal Trade Commission. Given some of
         | their prior rulemaking on fake reviews and undisclosed
         | compensation for endorsements, it seems the sort of thing that
         | could be easily be prosecuted under false advertising laws.
         | Unfortunately, I'm inclined to believe that the decision to let
         | dying legacy media companies get away with fraud is probably a
         | political one.
         | 
         | [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39433451
        
       | zachmu wrote:
       | What's interesting to me is how quickly AI generated art came to
       | be expected, unexceptional. Every random blog post has a couple
       | AI generated images now, they are completely unremarkable and
       | uninteresting. The novelty wore off basically instantaneously.
       | They're just the new corporate art style.
        
         | reducesuffering wrote:
         | It's only been a year. As SORA shows, state of the art images
         | and videos will soon be undetectable by human eye and it's very
         | soon coming to proliferate every "content" you interact with.
        
           | neuralRiot wrote:
           | Does it really matter? AI will generate the images or video
           | according to the introduces prompts so the creativity falls
           | in the one entering them, you could be an excellent piano
           | player but that doesn't make you a composer.
        
           | tivert wrote:
           | >> What's interesting to me is how quickly AI generated art
           | came to be expected, unexceptional. Every random blog post
           | has a couple AI generated images now, they are completely
           | unremarkable and uninteresting. The novelty wore off
           | basically instantaneously. They're just the new corporate art
           | style.
           | 
           | > It's only been a year. As SORA shows, state of the art
           | images and videos will soon be undetectable by human eye and
           | it's very soon coming to proliferate every "content" you
           | interact with.
           | 
           | Even if the "AI" generated images will be "undetectable by
           | human eye," they'll still be _at least_ "completely
           | unremarkable and uninteresting" and more likely crappy and
           | stupid (even if all the people have the right number of
           | fingers now).
           | 
           | I predict the floodgate of that "AI" generated stuff will
           | reduce the production of _actually good and creative_ art and
           | images _and_ make what is produced harder to find.
        
         | ecronant wrote:
         | I think it is like if you gave everyone spray paint cans and
         | said go paint, you wouldn't expect all the buildings around to
         | have giant Basquiat inspired murals everywhere.
         | 
         | It would just be ugly, shitty graffiti, everywhere.
        
       | parl_match wrote:
       | For a year or two now, I've been saying this is inevitable. It's
       | also going to heavily impact open forums like reddit and 4chan,
       | and maybe even HN.
       | 
       | It'll be hard to identify a spammer who posts like a normal
       | person but occasionally leaves a comment about enjoying a
       | product.
        
       | FrustratedMonky wrote:
       | More "Enshittification".
       | 
       | It is just happening so much faster than expected.
       | 
       | For a little while there were studies about AI training data
       | being poisoned by the AI generated content online. AI digesting
       | AI.
       | 
       | It was expected to happen 'in the future' not 'the day after
       | tomorrow'.
        
       | polemic wrote:
       | I ran into this today while searching for a way to merge channels
       | in Slack. A google search turned up this result
       | https://www.process.st/how-to/merge-channels-in-slack/ which
       | describes an in-app method that _does not exist_.
       | 
       | That entire website should be banned from Google.
        
         | amluto wrote:
         | It should also be banned from AI training data sets. Good luck
         | to anyone trying to train an AI!
         | 
         | As far as I can tell, GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 are extremely
         | aggressive about making up features of widely used software
         | that don't actually exist. I lost count of how many tables and
         | columns in MySQL's INFORMATION_SCHEMA they made up for me
         | yesterday, often complete with elaborate SQL commands to query
         | them.
         | 
         | The next generation of models will train on this crap.
        
       | logtempo wrote:
       | Maybe it will put emphasis on the social aspect of internet.
       | Maybe people will be more sceptikal. by having t know your
       | source, having small but trustworthy network based on real
       | people...
       | 
       | maybe that will change the shape of internet and lead to premium
       | internet service where experts are paid to provide currated
       | informations.
       | 
       | does not sounds too bad tbh.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-03-21 23:02 UTC)