4 ms·

All publishers are grappling with this where they want generally higher quality content (defined as more engaging, intrinsic quality is something else) and less

All publishers are grappling with this where they want generally higher quality content (defined as more engaging, intrinsic quality is something else) and less low effort spam or retreaded concepts. AI-generated content has really dropped the floor on how cheap it is to produce niche blogspam, and they're saying: "Hey if you're pushing out 1000s of articles a day on a topic and we look at it and it's insane gibberish, we're just going to assume it's no good on principle and ban you." Nobody is getting banned for the "Gray-AI" of assisted writing, where you get help with an outline or use Grammarly Pro to rewrite your sentences into coherence.

Verdex 2y ago
I believe this to be the correct take away. They don't actually want to ban AI content. They want to ban garbage content. If they claim that something is AI content, then it's not like there's a good defense a writer can offer. Short of meticulously recording themselves typing the article up on a typewriter in real life ahead of time. In real time so everyone can see them going through revisions. This is AI and we're banning you, is simply a sufficiently socially acceptable reason to get rid of content that they otherwise don't want clogging up their site.
- red_admiral 2y ago
  Indeed. xkcd 810 comes to mind.
  - monkpit 2y ago
    https://xkcd.com/810/ https://xkcd.com/810/
- sebastiennight 2y ago
  Well someone could easily whip up a prompt-to-video which, given a prompt, outputs an entire article AND a screenrecording of laboriously typing-and-revising from a draft to the final output. It would probably take a weekend.
  - Verdex 2y ago
    I would love to see something like that. I think it would be really neat. (Any takers? I hear it probably won't even take that long.) [Of course if you were creating and uploading these videos as you create your content over time. And the upload site was either relatively well known or sufficiently third party that you can trust the timestamps, then I think it wouldn't matter if it was AI or not. "Hey, this person isn't using AI, they've been uploading videos of their process for years. Who in the world would do that just so they can get away with using AI five years later?" It's not really a proof so much as it is a social proof. The person under fire needs a socially acceptable way to fight back against a socially acceptable ban-able offense. At least in my experience, lots of paper work normally does the trick.]
the_snooze 2y ago
>AI-generated content has really dropped the floor on how cheap it is to produce niche blogspam For all the potential good utility AI has, my current outlook is that it's primarily going to be used as a noise-generator at scale. As long as there's money (or influence) to be had from clicks and advertisement, the near-zero cost of AI-generated content means people will take advantage of that arbitrage opportunity.
- bee_rider 2y ago
  On the bright side we’ve desperately needed a noise filter for, like, a decade or so. At least these LLMs are a big noticeable discontinuity to make the problem obvious.
  - yifanl 2y ago
    On the gloomier side, if we couldn't come up with a good noise filter in the relatively calm times of the pre-LLM era, are we going to find something now?
taneq 2y ago
The real issue isn't 'insane gibberish', because that's quickly and cheaply discernible. The real issue is eloquent, well written text that looks like a new contribution but is actually a re-hashed mixture of the same six talking points as the other 1000 articles published by the same entity, because you have to actually read and think about it to realise that it's wasted your time. We're not fighting against random noise, we're fighting against manufactured pap.
- neverokay 2y ago
  Even so, if the paradigm shift occurs most of us will be summarizing the manufactured pap via an LLM. Our time won’t be wasted in that case. No clue how this all ends, but I can’t see any reason for websites to exist anymore. We’ll be going from one black prompt screen LLM with a Reddit logo on the top left, to another tab with the same LLM with a Medium logo on the top left. Seems pointless, just combine it and list the sources.
  - sebastiennight 2y ago
    The problem is you're summarizing bland fake information, though. There are entire categories of searches that I've now given up on. Want to remove <x> stain from <y> fabric? You can only find SEO-optimized results (not just Google ; DuckDuckGo and Qwant are the same) which will always tell you - use vinegar - use baking soda - use both! - try lemon - if all fails, try (insert guaranteed epic fail recipe eg ammonia mixed with salt) There you go, I just "summarized" thousands of those websites for you. Now try it on your real-word stain? I think we're going back full-circle to calling Mom and do what she'll recommend.
    - the_snooze 2y ago
      >I think we're going back full-circle to calling Mom and do what she'll recommend. In a sense, the old-fashioned way works so well because it relies on actual human connections and trust. Your mom isn't trying to sell you Miracle Cleaner 2000. Your friends don't get a commission for recommending a book they think you'd like. On the internet, the whole world is trying to sell you something, and they have little incentive to STFU. There's no connection, only transaction for fractions of pennies.
MSFT_Edging 2y ago
> use Grammarly Pro to rewrite your sentences into coherence Is it just me or is this a bizarre practice for someone who is actively making money on writing? Like, shouldn't you be expected to at least have competence in your craft? Writing with correct grammar should be the baseline of someone writing for profit. Or even "help with an outline", if you can't write an outline of what you're trying to communicate, and you need the averaging machine to help you, do you actually have a unique understanding of the topic? Or are you merely rehashing existing content that's been fed into the averaging machine?
- aftbit 2y ago
  I think it's just you. That's like saying you should know how to spell perfectly if you're a professional writer, and should not use spell check. LLMs are just spell check on steroids.
  - MSFT_Edging 2y ago
    What about the argument of using the AI to create an outline? Surely spelling has no effect on the outline if you understand the concept? The outline isn't being published, it's just the author laying out their thoughts on a topic that they're claiming to have some authority in. If the author cannot outline their ideas, even with bad grammar and spelling, do they actually understand the concept?
    - aftbit 2y ago
      I am not a natural language professional so I don't fully understand how outlines are used by authors. If I map that to software, I might think of asking an LLM to generate pseudocode for something. Of course I could do this myself (assuming I understand the problem domain), but why not ask an LLM to help me? I will just use whatever it generates as a starting point and edit it to fit my goals and specific objectives. Maybe outline tools are used to do something similar?
- stavros 2y ago
  Exactly, tools like this help bring your writing up to "average", if you're making a living writing, you should already be much better than that. It's kind of like a painter using a "paint by numbers" canvas.
radarsat1 2y ago
> Nobody is getting banned for the "Gray-AI" of assisted writing, where you get help with an outline Maybe not but it's certainly worth worrying that this is what will happen just because the line has to be drawn somewhere and that's an easier way to draw it. Baby, bathwater, etc.

Verdex 2y ago

I believe this to be the correct take away. They don't actually want to ban AI content. They want to ban garbage content. If they claim that something is AI content, then it's not like there's a good defense a writer can offer. Short of meticulously recording themselves typing the article up on a typewriter in real life ahead of time. In real time so everyone can see them going through revisions. This is AI and we're banning you, is simply a sufficiently socially acceptable reason to get rid of content that they otherwise don't want clogging up their site.

red_admiral 2y ago
Indeed. xkcd 810 comes to mind.
- monkpit 2y ago
  https://xkcd.com/810/ https://xkcd.com/810/
sebastiennight 2y ago
Well someone could easily whip up a prompt-to-video which, given a prompt, outputs an entire article AND a screenrecording of laboriously typing-and-revising from a draft to the final output. It would probably take a weekend.
- Verdex 2y ago
  I would love to see something like that. I think it would be really neat. (Any takers? I hear it probably won't even take that long.) [Of course if you were creating and uploading these videos as you create your content over time. And the upload site was either relatively well known or sufficiently third party that you can trust the timestamps, then I think it wouldn't matter if it was AI or not. "Hey, this person isn't using AI, they've been uploading videos of their process for years. Who in the world would do that just so they can get away with using AI five years later?" It's not really a proof so much as it is a social proof. The person under fire needs a socially acceptable way to fight back against a socially acceptable ban-able offense. At least in my experience, lots of paper work normally does the trick.]

the_snooze 2y ago

>AI-generated content has really dropped the floor on how cheap it is to produce niche blogspam For all the potential good utility AI has, my current outlook is that it's primarily going to be used as a noise-generator at scale. As long as there's money (or influence) to be had from clicks and advertisement, the near-zero cost of AI-generated content means people will take advantage of that arbitrage opportunity.

bee_rider 2y ago
On the bright side we’ve desperately needed a noise filter for, like, a decade or so. At least these LLMs are a big noticeable discontinuity to make the problem obvious.
- yifanl 2y ago
  On the gloomier side, if we couldn't come up with a good noise filter in the relatively calm times of the pre-LLM era, are we going to find something now?

taneq 2y ago

The real issue isn't 'insane gibberish', because that's quickly and cheaply discernible. The real issue is eloquent, well written text that looks like a new contribution but is actually a re-hashed mixture of the same six talking points as the other 1000 articles published by the same entity, because you have to actually read and think about it to realise that it's wasted your time. We're not fighting against random noise, we're fighting against manufactured pap.

neverokay 2y ago
Even so, if the paradigm shift occurs most of us will be summarizing the manufactured pap via an LLM. Our time won’t be wasted in that case. No clue how this all ends, but I can’t see any reason for websites to exist anymore. We’ll be going from one black prompt screen LLM with a Reddit logo on the top left, to another tab with the same LLM with a Medium logo on the top left. Seems pointless, just combine it and list the sources.
- sebastiennight 2y ago
  The problem is you're summarizing bland fake information, though. There are entire categories of searches that I've now given up on. Want to remove <x> stain from <y> fabric? You can only find SEO-optimized results (not just Google ; DuckDuckGo and Qwant are the same) which will always tell you - use vinegar - use baking soda - use both! - try lemon - if all fails, try (insert guaranteed epic fail recipe eg ammonia mixed with salt) There you go, I just "summarized" thousands of those websites for you. Now try it on your real-word stain? I think we're going back full-circle to calling Mom and do what she'll recommend.
  - the_snooze 2y ago
    >I think we're going back full-circle to calling Mom and do what she'll recommend. In a sense, the old-fashioned way works so well because it relies on actual human connections and trust. Your mom isn't trying to sell you Miracle Cleaner 2000. Your friends don't get a commission for recommending a book they think you'd like. On the internet, the whole world is trying to sell you something, and they have little incentive to STFU. There's no connection, only transaction for fractions of pennies.

MSFT_Edging 2y ago

> use Grammarly Pro to rewrite your sentences into coherence Is it just me or is this a bizarre practice for someone who is actively making money on writing? Like, shouldn't you be expected to at least have competence in your craft? Writing with correct grammar should be the baseline of someone writing for profit. Or even "help with an outline", if you can't write an outline of what you're trying to communicate, and you need the averaging machine to help you, do you actually have a unique understanding of the topic? Or are you merely rehashing existing content that's been fed into the averaging machine?

aftbit 2y ago
I think it's just you. That's like saying you should know how to spell perfectly if you're a professional writer, and should not use spell check. LLMs are just spell check on steroids.
- MSFT_Edging 2y ago
  What about the argument of using the AI to create an outline? Surely spelling has no effect on the outline if you understand the concept? The outline isn't being published, it's just the author laying out their thoughts on a topic that they're claiming to have some authority in. If the author cannot outline their ideas, even with bad grammar and spelling, do they actually understand the concept?
  - aftbit 2y ago
    I am not a natural language professional so I don't fully understand how outlines are used by authors. If I map that to software, I might think of asking an LLM to generate pseudocode for something. Of course I could do this myself (assuming I understand the problem domain), but why not ask an LLM to help me? I will just use whatever it generates as a starting point and edit it to fit my goals and specific objectives. Maybe outline tools are used to do something similar?
stavros 2y ago
Exactly, tools like this help bring your writing up to "average", if you're making a living writing, you should already be much better than that. It's kind of like a painter using a "paint by numbers" canvas.

radarsat1 2y ago

> Nobody is getting banned for the "Gray-AI" of assisted writing, where you get help with an outline Maybe not but it's certainly worth worrying that this is what will happen just because the line has to be drawn somewhere and that's an easier way to draw it. Baby, bathwater, etc.