4 ms·

I'm having trouble understanding the terms being used by the article. First off - bots. Generally I understood them as automatic agents doing something a person

I'm having trouble understanding the terms being used by the article. First off - bots. Generally I understood them as automatic agents doing something a person otherwise would do themselves. This doesn't seem to be the definition in use here: > why would a small percentage, though small, find anything positive about the bots, about being lied to Under the "bots = automation" definition, this is similar to saying "why would anyone find anything positive about computer programs". Instead, this article is saying: bots = lies Does the article actually talk about astroturfing trolls leveraging automation? The automation part doesn't seem to be relevant, as paid trolls are the problem. In the end, I understand that the article has a problem with lying on the internet, but what does "bot" mean to the society at large these days?

forapurpose 8y ago
> bots = lies Bots that attempt to make themselves indistinguishable from humans - the bots under consideration in this article - are attempting to deceive people. If something is signed 'Amazon Ad Bot' or 'Moscow Political Ad Agency Bot, funded by the Bob Charles for Senate campaign', that's one thing. If it's signed 'Amy Jones", that's a lie. > The automation part doesn't seem to be relevant, as paid trolls are the problem. Without the automation, the paid trolls' reach would be far less. It's like saying, 'the nuclear weapons part doesn't seem to be relevant; it's the hostile dictator that's the problem'. So far, the most common issue raised in this HN discussion is the poor bots being demonized. Only on HN.
colordrops 8y ago
This is similar to the futile struggle to get people to stop calling "crackers" "hackers". "Bot" has now come to encompass "bot", "troll", "sock puppet", and "shill".
- CM30 8y ago
  Or for that matter, the struggle to get people to stop calling bullies, harassers, bots and sockpuppets 'trolls'. Troll used to mean 'someone who who said/did things for the sole purpose of annoying people'. Not 'annoying person/bot online I don't like' But as with hacker, these terms have basically lost all meaning now.
  - gaius 8y ago
    these terms have basically lost all meaning now Hell, someone the other day passed me their phone and asked me to take a “selfie” of them...
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
colechristensen 8y ago
Bots in this context are programs masquerading as people who do not exist. "Do this on my behalf" automation is different than "behave with these parameters" autonomy. There is a grey area, but the differences are who is making decisions, who is being represented, and what is the motivation.
- craftyguy 8y ago
  > "Do this on my behalf" automation is different than "behave with these parameters" autonomy. Is it though? The "on my behalf" implies that there are parameters specified.
  - colechristensen 8y ago
    It is hard to state directly, and there is a lot of ambiguity. The difference I'm trying to establish is between directing specific actions (post this at 3:45 Tuesday) and directing behavior (every hour upvote all posts positively portraying hot air balloons) Digging too far into the difference between automated and autonomous obscures the larger point I was trying to make.
skybrian 8y ago
Fake reviews might be the best example. The lie is that there is a person who bought the product and has an opinion about it. Or a fake account on Twitter might not just be automated, but pretends to be a human who has an opinion, in an attempt to shift what people believe are common opinions, or just to raise follower counts. Presumably if an automated account isn't trying to look human then it's unlikely to be mistaken for one, although if it's just there to bump up a number, it might not have to try very hard.

forapurpose 8y ago

> bots = lies Bots that attempt to make themselves indistinguishable from humans - the bots under consideration in this article - are attempting to deceive people. If something is signed 'Amazon Ad Bot' or 'Moscow Political Ad Agency Bot, funded by the Bob Charles for Senate campaign', that's one thing. If it's signed 'Amy Jones", that's a lie. > The automation part doesn't seem to be relevant, as paid trolls are the problem. Without the automation, the paid trolls' reach would be far less. It's like saying, 'the nuclear weapons part doesn't seem to be relevant; it's the hostile dictator that's the problem'. So far, the most common issue raised in this HN discussion is the poor bots being demonized. Only on HN.

colordrops 8y ago

This is similar to the futile struggle to get people to stop calling "crackers" "hackers". "Bot" has now come to encompass "bot", "troll", "sock puppet", and "shill".

CM30 8y ago
Or for that matter, the struggle to get people to stop calling bullies, harassers, bots and sockpuppets 'trolls'. Troll used to mean 'someone who who said/did things for the sole purpose of annoying people'. Not 'annoying person/bot online I don't like' But as with hacker, these terms have basically lost all meaning now.
- gaius 8y ago
  these terms have basically lost all meaning now Hell, someone the other day passed me their phone and asked me to take a “selfie” of them...
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]

colechristensen 8y ago

Bots in this context are programs masquerading as people who do not exist. "Do this on my behalf" automation is different than "behave with these parameters" autonomy. There is a grey area, but the differences are who is making decisions, who is being represented, and what is the motivation.

craftyguy 8y ago
> "Do this on my behalf" automation is different than "behave with these parameters" autonomy. Is it though? The "on my behalf" implies that there are parameters specified.
- colechristensen 8y ago
  It is hard to state directly, and there is a lot of ambiguity. The difference I'm trying to establish is between directing specific actions (post this at 3:45 Tuesday) and directing behavior (every hour upvote all posts positively portraying hot air balloons) Digging too far into the difference between automated and autonomous obscures the larger point I was trying to make.

skybrian 8y ago

Fake reviews might be the best example. The lie is that there is a person who bought the product and has an opinion about it. Or a fake account on Twitter might not just be automated, but pretends to be a human who has an opinion, in an attempt to shift what people believe are common opinions, or just to raise follower counts. Presumably if an automated account isn't trying to look human then it's unlikely to be mistaken for one, although if it's just there to bump up a number, it might not have to try very hard.