3 ms·
Obviously in context I'm talking about "human content", such as we are creating here. Of course the majority of the traffic on the internet by raw bytes is vid
by jerf 3y ago
Obviously in context I'm talking about "human content", such as we are creating here.
Of course the majority of the traffic on the internet by raw bytes is video, but that was clearly not what I'm talking about.
"If you're happier with a unique personalized reddit"
There is an element of deception there. If I think I'm interacting with real humans, I want to be interacting with real humans, not bots. And nobody but nobody will just generously spend the money to do that, and then leave me a perfect simulation of a human space. They're going to have some ulterior motive and it will not be in my best interests.
I will agree that a shocking-to-me number of people are not bothered by this prospect. Perhaps you are one of them who would not mind. You do you, as the saying goes. I am bothered about being deceived. Truth matters to me and I have no interest in being comprehensively lied to like that.
- brookst 3y agoI think you underestimate people's intelligence. Your hypothetical AI reddit won't deceive anyone because the people using it will be perfectly happy knowing it's all generated, the same way people playing video games are not "deceived" into thinking they are watching a film with actors, and people driving cars are not "deceived" into thinking there's a horse in there somewhere. AI is complicated, but seeing it as mimicry of pre-AI reality is far too narrow to capture the real change (and the real concerns).
- jart 3y agoGenerally I agree, although it'll totally happen to people who get shadowbanned, since having an LLM reply to a banned user's invisible comments will make it less likely they'll refresh their VPN and create another account.
- jerf 3y agoI am assuming that someone is setting out to deceive, not advertising it as a fake reddit. We already had that. (It was pretty funny.) I'm also not just talking about someone hooking up the publicly-available and known language models of May 2023 to this. You going to guarantee me that "nobody" will be deceived in even just another year's worth of public progress? Or five? Ten? And "nobody" is a really tall bar... should we at least set the bar at 100IQ or 110, just in the interests of fairness? 2022 discussions of "income inequality" will have nothing on 2032's if a 150 IQ and heavy education becomes necessary to navigate the internet successfully.