3 ms·
The point is that you don’t need to converse. Most things are passively consumed — articles etc. by the vast majority of people who come away convinced or resha
by EGreg 4y ago
The point is that you don’t need to converse. Most things are passively consumed — articles etc. by the vast majority of people who come away convinced or reshare them.
GPT-3 can bullshit many things convingly enough and at scale to make people reshare and vouch for it. Also, other chatbots can leave comments and reshare masquerading as real opinionated supporters in a “mob” and likewise barely answer you.
Remember… it’s not that you the one person who talks to them has to be convinced. It’s that your existing forums and chats and platforms can be gradually infiltrated with bots that convince OTHERS the vast majority of whom never did a turing test.
Think of how your opinion was formed on many political things, it likely happened non-interactively by just consuming articles and comments, and seemingly “defeated” arguments of OTHERS who could have all been bots.
- wsinks 4y agoThank you for your second post (kind of answered my other reply to you already) I've seen how gnarly instagram bot comments already are, and wondered how many people are bots vs. people on there. It's not economical to turing test them all, so I've had to assume that they're all propaganda... and even then I've noticed the influence on deciding what's social. How would you measure the success of this, if you were making them?