4 ms·
Your point is valid, but i disagree with the framing. The issue is the blind trust that the internet is built on top of. It's was that initial good faith that
by disambiguation 1y ago
Your point is valid, but i disagree with the framing.
The issue is the blind trust that the internet is built on top of.
It's was that initial good faith that made the internet a special thing - you could come online and discover all the weird interesting things people were up to, have conversations with real people that weren't possible in the real world.
At this point most platforms have figured out how to exploit and profit off the blind trust - but AI is threatening to annihilate it completely.
I'm not worried about the generic content, the worthwhile stuff is what's at risk.
- tim333 1y ago>the blind trust that the internet is built on top of I've always thought of it as kind of the opposite - the one information network that is pretty much unpoliced where anyone can publish any nonsense or lies they feel like. It works because people do have some ability to distinguish truth from lies and the open nature means people can publish truth too.
- disambiguation 1y ago> people do have some ability to distinguish truth from lies In a pre-AI era, this is a reasonable heuristic. But I think everyone has their own internal barometer - how much trash are they willing to sift through for gold? I'm concerned that AI will poison the well to such an extent that people stop trusting, and subsequently stop using, the web altogether. This isn't only a sad state of affairs for the average user, but ties into an existential risk for the business model of the entire tech industry.
- tim333 1y agoThe main trick of looking who or what the source is should still work. I've actually found the LLMs quite good for debunking false facts. It's quite funny seeing Elon Musk interact with Grok when it points out his untruths.