4 ms·

I swear that the amount of astroturfing in the comment field by AI bots being positive towards AI is at an all time high as well.

nephihaha 1mo ago
For me, I'm surprised to see people proposing conformist views and trying to push whatever the establishment is pushing.
- seizethecheese 1mo ago
  I dunno, I was a contrarian with blockchain and now am conformist with AI. Being contrarian for its own sake is pretty stupid.
  - krapp 1mo ago
    >Being contrarian for its own sake is pretty stupid. All progress depends on the unreasonable man.
    - nephihaha 1mo ago
      Got to say I agree with this. Contrarians can be an annoyance, but someone's got to point out the Emperor's got no clothes on.
      - krapp 1mo ago
        Contrarians are usually wrong, they're more wrong more often than other people. But when they're right, they tend to be ahead of the curve.
        nephihaha 1mo ago
        At the risk of being one myself... I usually find that there is some flaw in just about any set up and someone has to address that. Constant negativity is not a virtue of course, but neither is complete compliance and agreement. Most people will agree with whoever is in charge, and it takes a lot to shake them out of that. It is clearly a flaw in the human species.
CoastalCoder 1mo ago
I'm not sure I'd be able to (confidently) tell the difference between human and SOTA bot comments. Is there something trick to it?
- redsocksfan45 1mo ago
  [dead]
dgellow 1mo ago
FWIW I’ve seen people complaining of the exact opposite. Difficult to say without measuring
- 1dom 1mo ago
  This makes no sense to me - what's the opposite of AI astroturfing? Why are people complaining about it? Ironically, your comment could easily be a failed comment from an astroturfing LLM tasked with criticising/disagreeing with people calling out LLMs. FWIW, I checked your profile, I don't really think you're an LLM. The internet is hard now - sorry :(
  - dgellow 1mo ago
    I’m indeed a fleshy human :) What I meant is that I’ve seen people complaining that the negativity towards AI on HN is manufactured and astroturfed. So we have people complaining on both ends of the debate. I would bet that the AI booster side is way more astroturfed, but I’m very likely biased (I see genAI as a horrible mistake for human societies)
    - brazukadev 1mo ago
      > (I see genAI as a horrible mistake for human societies) GenAI is amazing, how we use it is so far a horrible mistake.
      - dgellow 1mo ago
        It’s technically very interesting and fascinating, but the incentives are horrible
dang 1mo ago
Links?
- my-next-account 1mo ago
  I aint got none.
  - dang 1mo ago
    That's fine, but it would be helpful to see examples. People often make generic claims about astroturfing, bots, etc. that don't hold up in practice when we look at the data. Bots and genai comments also exist, of course, and are not allowed here (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html#generated https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html#generated).
    - cljacoby 1mo ago
      Does HN do proactive detection and/or flagging of comments determined to be AI generated? I understand if information publicized on how this process might work is intentionally restricted, so as not to be easily circumvented. I'm also not asking this in a pointed or judgmental way with respect to HN, I'm mostly just curious how various social platforms are approaching this problem.
      - dredmorbius 1mo ago
        Yes, to the extent that mods will admonish what appear to be AI-generated comments: <https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=pastYear&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20can%20you%20please%20not%20post%20ai-generated&sort=byPopularity&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=pastYear&page=0&prefix=tru...> Articles are a fuzzier area AFAIU: <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48887149 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48887149> (Not a mod myself, though I watch mod actions fairly closely.)
    - brazukadev 1mo ago
      > People often make generic claims about astroturfing, bots, etc. that don't hold up in practice when we look at the data. I'd be very careful with believing the system that looks for bots and astroturfing works well enough to confidently say that. Some of the people, corporations and institutions interested in manipulating HN and its audience are quite capable.
bitwize 1mo ago
AI has legitimately changed everything. It's not 2022 anymore. Try a recent LLM and set it to a coding task. For even moderate tasks, things you could burn a weekend or more on, the model will complete it in minutes, to a high degree of quality. It can write code better than most programmers, faster than any human. If that doesn't inspire positive feelings, it should at least fill you with awe. We live in an age of wonders.
- krapp 1mo ago
  >If that doesn't inspire positive feelings, it should at least fill you with awe. We live in an age of wonders. It's impressive, despite its ethical baggage and psychological, environmental and psychological harm. But if if filed you in awe I think you need to get away from the keyboard. Things are happening in biology, astronomy, archaeology, engineering, that are far more awesome than software that can write code for you. And if your only response to that is to be in awe of whatever part AI may have had in the process, you're still missing the point.
Legend2440 1mo ago
Did you know that not everyone who disagrees with you is a bot? Some people are genuinely excited about AI.

nephihaha 1mo ago

For me, I'm surprised to see people proposing conformist views and trying to push whatever the establishment is pushing.

seizethecheese 1mo ago
I dunno, I was a contrarian with blockchain and now am conformist with AI. Being contrarian for its own sake is pretty stupid.
- krapp 1mo ago
  >Being contrarian for its own sake is pretty stupid. All progress depends on the unreasonable man.
  - nephihaha 1mo ago
    Got to say I agree with this. Contrarians can be an annoyance, but someone's got to point out the Emperor's got no clothes on.
    - krapp 1mo ago
      Contrarians are usually wrong, they're more wrong more often than other people. But when they're right, they tend to be ahead of the curve.
      - nephihaha 1mo ago
        At the risk of being one myself... I usually find that there is some flaw in just about any set up and someone has to address that. Constant negativity is not a virtue of course, but neither is complete compliance and agreement. Most people will agree with whoever is in charge, and it takes a lot to shake them out of that. It is clearly a flaw in the human species.

CoastalCoder 1mo ago

I'm not sure I'd be able to (confidently) tell the difference between human and SOTA bot comments. Is there something trick to it?

redsocksfan45 1mo ago
[dead]

dgellow 1mo ago

FWIW I’ve seen people complaining of the exact opposite. Difficult to say without measuring

1dom 1mo ago
This makes no sense to me - what's the opposite of AI astroturfing? Why are people complaining about it? Ironically, your comment could easily be a failed comment from an astroturfing LLM tasked with criticising/disagreeing with people calling out LLMs. FWIW, I checked your profile, I don't really think you're an LLM. The internet is hard now - sorry :(
- dgellow 1mo ago
  I’m indeed a fleshy human :) What I meant is that I’ve seen people complaining that the negativity towards AI on HN is manufactured and astroturfed. So we have people complaining on both ends of the debate. I would bet that the AI booster side is way more astroturfed, but I’m very likely biased (I see genAI as a horrible mistake for human societies)
  - brazukadev 1mo ago
    > (I see genAI as a horrible mistake for human societies) GenAI is amazing, how we use it is so far a horrible mistake.
    - dgellow 1mo ago
      It’s technically very interesting and fascinating, but the incentives are horrible

dang 1mo ago

Links?

my-next-account 1mo ago
I aint got none.
- dang 1mo ago
  That's fine, but it would be helpful to see examples. People often make generic claims about astroturfing, bots, etc. that don't hold up in practice when we look at the data. Bots and genai comments also exist, of course, and are not allowed here (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html#generated https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html#generated).
  - cljacoby 1mo ago
    Does HN do proactive detection and/or flagging of comments determined to be AI generated? I understand if information publicized on how this process might work is intentionally restricted, so as not to be easily circumvented. I'm also not asking this in a pointed or judgmental way with respect to HN, I'm mostly just curious how various social platforms are approaching this problem.
    - dredmorbius 1mo ago
      Yes, to the extent that mods will admonish what appear to be AI-generated comments: <https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=pastYear&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20can%20you%20please%20not%20post%20ai-generated&sort=byPopularity&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=pastYear&page=0&prefix=tru...> Articles are a fuzzier area AFAIU: <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48887149 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48887149> (Not a mod myself, though I watch mod actions fairly closely.)
  - brazukadev 1mo ago
    > People often make generic claims about astroturfing, bots, etc. that don't hold up in practice when we look at the data. I'd be very careful with believing the system that looks for bots and astroturfing works well enough to confidently say that. Some of the people, corporations and institutions interested in manipulating HN and its audience are quite capable.

bitwize 1mo ago

AI has legitimately changed everything. It's not 2022 anymore. Try a recent LLM and set it to a coding task. For even moderate tasks, things you could burn a weekend or more on, the model will complete it in minutes, to a high degree of quality. It can write code better than most programmers, faster than any human. If that doesn't inspire positive feelings, it should at least fill you with awe. We live in an age of wonders.

krapp 1mo ago
>If that doesn't inspire positive feelings, it should at least fill you with awe. We live in an age of wonders. It's impressive, despite its ethical baggage and psychological, environmental and psychological harm. But if if filed you in awe I think you need to get away from the keyboard. Things are happening in biology, astronomy, archaeology, engineering, that are far more awesome than software that can write code for you. And if your only response to that is to be in awe of whatever part AI may have had in the process, you're still missing the point.

Legend2440 1mo ago

Did you know that not everyone who disagrees with you is a bot? Some people are genuinely excited about AI.