4 ms·

> Eventually, nothing of value will be posted. (like facebook?) I'm in a couple of dozen groups on Facebook and they produce interesting and thoughtful content

> Eventually, nothing of value will be posted. (like facebook?) I'm in a couple of dozen groups on Facebook and they produce interesting and thoughtful content every day. Of course I wish they were on the open web, but don't blame the network.

levhawk 2y ago
After your post I tried to find dotnet groups in facebook, but all I found is spam and almost no humans, which again reminded me about dead internet theory. Could you please recommend some groups?
freetonik 2y ago
Would you mind sharing links to those groups? (unless they are local to your community/region/etc.)
MichaelZuo 2y ago
The open web as a concept doesn’t really make sense anymore, at least for written content. Since by definition it will need to be open to the majority of the world’s population, regardless of writing skill, but the bottom half of writers are already indistinguishable from cutting edge LLM output. And no one can install some sort of worldwide identity verification system, or it wouldn’t be ‘open’ anymore.
- carlosjobim 2y ago
  Are you talking about the quality of the prose or about the content of writing? An LLM can only act on information that has been put into it by people, while a real person can create new and important information – even a person with low literal or oratory skills.
  - MichaelZuo 2y ago
    Both. How do you differentiate between say 20 real people with low skills and LLM output lightly edited by a high skilled individual?
    - carlosjobim 2y ago
      If I could differentiate between it, then what the real person wrote or said would still have a separate value, even if the prose was bad. Consider a normal criminal court case. Most witnesses don't know how to express themselves well neither in the written nor spoken word. Their testimony still holds value and gives important information.
      - MichaelZuo 2y ago
        But you can’t differentiate it… unless you have some method that you can share?
        carlosjobim 2y ago
        Of course we can separate fact from fiction if we need: By checking up things ourselves. There is only 1 reality and only 1 truth.
        MichaelZuo 2y ago
        Why wouldn’t the fake output mimic real human output after some light editing? And it’s not like a live video call, where a few seconds delay would be noticeable. There would still be a real human being, just as smart as you, behind the LLM, but pretending to be say 20 different lower skilled people.
        carlosjobim 2y ago
        Yes it would mimic real human output. That's why we have to verify if the subject matter is important. Knowing who to trust or not is not easy, if we have to be sure we have to do some work.
        MichaelZuo 2y ago
        I still don’t get how this helps you differentiate between them… or do you mean to assume both are genuine human outputs regardless, if the information proves to be genuinely true?
- Grimblewald 2y ago
  It's sad but I'd place LLM's above some of the bottom quartile writers. I am often convinced a person is a bot, when it turns out they were human after all.

levhawk 2y ago

After your post I tried to find dotnet groups in facebook, but all I found is spam and almost no humans, which again reminded me about dead internet theory. Could you please recommend some groups?

freetonik 2y ago

Would you mind sharing links to those groups? (unless they are local to your community/region/etc.)

MichaelZuo 2y ago

The open web as a concept doesn’t really make sense anymore, at least for written content. Since by definition it will need to be open to the majority of the world’s population, regardless of writing skill, but the bottom half of writers are already indistinguishable from cutting edge LLM output. And no one can install some sort of worldwide identity verification system, or it wouldn’t be ‘open’ anymore.

carlosjobim 2y ago
Are you talking about the quality of the prose or about the content of writing? An LLM can only act on information that has been put into it by people, while a real person can create new and important information – even a person with low literal or oratory skills.
- MichaelZuo 2y ago
  Both. How do you differentiate between say 20 real people with low skills and LLM output lightly edited by a high skilled individual?
  - carlosjobim 2y ago
    If I could differentiate between it, then what the real person wrote or said would still have a separate value, even if the prose was bad. Consider a normal criminal court case. Most witnesses don't know how to express themselves well neither in the written nor spoken word. Their testimony still holds value and gives important information.
    - MichaelZuo 2y ago
      But you can’t differentiate it… unless you have some method that you can share?
      - carlosjobim 2y ago
        Of course we can separate fact from fiction if we need: By checking up things ourselves. There is only 1 reality and only 1 truth.
        MichaelZuo 2y ago
        Why wouldn’t the fake output mimic real human output after some light editing? And it’s not like a live video call, where a few seconds delay would be noticeable. There would still be a real human being, just as smart as you, behind the LLM, but pretending to be say 20 different lower skilled people.
        carlosjobim 2y ago
        Yes it would mimic real human output. That's why we have to verify if the subject matter is important. Knowing who to trust or not is not easy, if we have to be sure we have to do some work.
        MichaelZuo 2y ago
        I still don’t get how this helps you differentiate between them… or do you mean to assume both are genuine human outputs regardless, if the information proves to be genuinely true?
Grimblewald 2y ago
It's sad but I'd place LLM's above some of the bottom quartile writers. I am often convinced a person is a bot, when it turns out they were human after all.