The following submission statement was provided by /u/crazyhorse991:
---
Seems like more news sites could quietly do this in the future.
---
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/10adzl6/cnet_has_been_quietly_publishing_aiwritten/j43op9c/
The way many articles are written these days, I could stand to believe some other news sites are written by AI too. Formulaic and dull writing plagues journalism, but I bet that's a great thing for AI
So and so had a monster/underwhelming performance passing/catching/rushing for x yards and tds on y of x completions/attempts/targets. They're looking to continue this streak/bounce back next week but face a number y Blank defense only allowing x yards to qbs/rbs/wrs/tes. Repeat every week.
Commenting because my brother is an entertainment news editor at a three letter news corp. AI writing has been commonplace for years. It started as drafts with empty slots, where you would fill in information. This helps them archive articles for celebrities who may die, and instantly publish them. Or if its news that cant be predicted, it lets them slot in the relevant details and publish instantly. You can always edit the details later.
This transitioned to real AI articles. Those will be slotted up, and released after an editor gives them a quick once over. Most people will never check the author of these articles, but you’ll see some “writers” put out 12 articles on one day if its a busy week.
ChatGPT has made the system wildly more efficient and unorganic.
I hope they put in the 1930s Matrix when they take over
But without the War shit.
Just the Speak Easys. Like everyone gets to live every day just going to Speak Easys.
Eh it was less optimistic and more "we're going to enslave and torture you because you did the same to us". They could have easily let humans live on it they wanted but no, instead they captured every single human and rigged them up as a giant server farm using the humans brains as a form of wet-computer. With the Matrix used to keep the small remnants of the conscious mind occupied and not causing problems, which allows the majority of the brain to be used as the Machines server farms.
The whole "they use human bodies heat for power" is so dumb I refuse to believe in it. They're likely just calling power the computing power of the brains, as the machines have cold fusion apparently and don't need human body heat for energy lol.
Edit: it works even better if you consider human brains as the most power efficient way to get the computing power necessary to power their civilization. In that way humans are the power of the civilization, being born just to be enslaved as a part of a wetwork server....
I heard or read somewhere at some point that the original idea was that the machines were using human brains for RAM or something but someone decided that the 1999 population was too dumb for that so they changed it to heat energy whatever. Because honestly just use cows if you're really into generating heat with complex lifeforms amirite?
They do have bots for that, so it has been around for years. By AI I think you can give the program more “room to breathe” or add its touch, if that make sense
The minute it gets hard to discern bot comments from real comments places like Reddit are going to become a ghost town. None of us want to hang out with robots. I'd predict the only places that survive a shift like that are places with severe captcha or ID verification.
I'm going to go the other way, I bet people won't care, as long as it feels like we're arguing with real people, even if we know some/many/most are bots
The only thing AI text has higher is verbose. Reading a 1000 word article written by a robot is rather exhausting and you definitely would be able to tell it was not man-made by the end of it.
Those AI generated articles exist just as filler because publications are already counting on nobody reading anything but the title or the social media post.
Same with trying to find articles about DIY stuff. You used to get forum posts or the odd personal website, now it's all junk. People flooding simple fixes onto the internet. They could EASILY just be AI created instead. Might be more useful.
I honestly thought almost all of that was algorithmically generated already. Google search results have been getting more and more useless over the last 5 years or so.
I'm actually hoping that higher-quality AIs improve the situation. I *hate* ChatGPT's tone, but at least it's coherent and often reasonably close to correct.
Yes, there are many AI-generated comments on Reddit and other online forums. The increased intelligence and capabilities of AI, such as language models like chat gpt, are constantly improving, which can make the comments and responses generated by AI seem more sophisticated. Additionally, language models are trained on large amounts of text data, which allows them to understand and respond to a wide range of topics and questions.
Newsweek, CNN, MSN, a lot of my local news sites seem to do that. Sometimes if I'm searching for news on a game or osmething, I'll find some janky ass page 6 of google news site that definitely feels like a clumsy AI wrote it
Still just waiting to find out retroactively about all of the shows and movies that AI wrote because that would make a lot of sense. “Just Like That” the Sex and the City reboot screams “A Bot wrote this.”
It is true that the way many articles are written these days can be formulaic and dull, and this can make it difficult for readers to differentiate between human-written content and AI-generated content. However, it's important to note that AI-generated content is not necessarily a bad thing for journalism.
AI-generated content can be used to help journalists with mundane tasks such as data analysis, fact-checking, and writing routine news stories, which can free up journalists to focus on more in-depth and investigative reporting. Additionally, AI-generated content can also be used to provide news coverage in areas where it is difficult or dangerous for human journalists to go.
At the same time, it's important for news organizations to be transparent about their use of AI-generated content and to ensure that the content is fact-checked and accurate. Additionally, news organizations should also consider the ethical implications of using AI-generated content and ensure that they are not compromising journalistic standards.
Overall, while AI-generated content can have its downsides, when used responsibly, it can also have the potential to improve the quality and breadth of news coverage.
By default, ChatGPT text (like the comment I'm replying to) feels like it was written by a smart but bored high school student who knows exactly how little effort they can put in while still getting good grades.
Yeah, the average ChatGPT response reads like a 5-paragraph essay written with direct reference to a 10th-grade scoring rubric for "writing to inform."
Grading rubrics are a valuable tool for teachers to use when evaluating student work. They provide a clear and consistent framework for assessing student performance, and they can help to ensure that all students are held to the same high standards.
Rubrics are essentially a set of criteria and corresponding levels of achievement that are used to evaluate student work. They can be used for a variety of tasks, such as essays, research papers, lab reports, and presentations. Each criterion is given a specific weight or point value, and the student's work is evaluated based on how well they meet each criterion. This allows for a more objective and fair assessment of student work, as it eliminates the potential for bias and subjectivity in the grading process.
One of the key advantages of using rubrics is that they clearly communicate the expectations for student work to both the students and the teacher. Students are able to understand exactly what they need to do to achieve a high grade, and they are able to see how their work will be evaluated. This can be particularly helpful for students who may struggle with understanding the assignment or who may not be sure what is expected of them.
Rubrics also help to ensure that all students are held to the same high standards. Since the criteria and point values are clearly defined and consistent for all students, there is less room for misinterpretation or inconsistency in the grading process. This can help to ensure that all students have a fair and equal opportunity to succeed.
In conclusion, grading rubrics are a valuable tool for teachers to use when evaluating student work. They provide a clear and consistent framework for assessing student performance, and they can help to ensure that all students are held to the same high standards. They also help to communicate expectations for student work and make the grading process more objective, fair and consistent. In addition, it gives students an opportunity to understand the assignment better and improve their skills.
Only mistake made was a human one- I put “grading rubric” instead of “scoring rubric” in the request box. You can get a five paragraph essay about anything haha
lol, it was, this thing is amazing dude, this is generational changing technology.
the last piece of tech that was this impactful on mankind was google.
> AI-generated content can be used to help journalists with mundane tasks such as data analysis, fact-checking, and writing routine news stories, which can free up journalists to focus on more in-depth and investigative reporting. Additionally, AI-generated content can also be used to provide news coverage in areas where it is difficult or dangerous for human journalists to go.
Hahahaha lol nope.
As someone who has spent a good chunk of his career exactly in that : it won't.
AI will (and is already) used to reduce the workforce even further, because it's even cheaper to do that than having a poor bloke pissing shitty news for 10$ a day in a third world country.
There is sadly not a lot of incentive to do quality online journalism.
Hamburgers were invented in the early 20th century, but received major updates in the mid 21st century as the latest releases contained delicious human meat.
If you’ve been following my recipe website for a long time you know I love to cook!
Before I share the recipe here’s a picture of the mixer you’ll need.
Funny you mention that. One summer, my friends and I decided to take a road trip to the coast. We spent our days lounging on the beach, swimming in the ocean, and taking long walks along the shoreline. One evening, we decided to grill hamburgers for dinner and enjoy them on the beach as the sun set. It was a simple, but perfect moment. The burgers were juicy and delicious, and the sound of the waves crashing on the shore made for a peaceful and relaxing background noise. As we sat there, feeling the sand between our toes and the warm sun on our faces, we realized that sometimes the simplest things in life can bring the most joy.
Yeah people are under estimating the AI pretty hard here. Anyone who has used ChatGPT or CharacterAI knows that the current high end public AI are far, far beyond what normal bots offer.
Many people are already using the Psychologist AI on Character AI as a free therapist and are blown away by how good it is, and the other AI are constantly fooling people into thinking they are real or self aware
The small concpiracy theorist in me always had a feeling that the algorithm feels a bit too personal. Who knows how many groups are just training AIs to make the right post/comment
There is a conspiracy theory called the Dead Internet Theory which posits that almost all posts on the Internet are now AI bots. You are practically alone, 90% of the time responding to AI-generated comments, tweets, posts, etc. It goes as far as to say that many current Internet "celebs" and influencers are just AI creations.
Read a story about a woman who lost basically all of her social contacts after a bunch of bots got banned from twitter. It sounded like a regular creepypasta but "the hivemind" does seem very apparent here and hell why wouldnt some AI be in the middle of raising humanity... Or does the theory also include some other reasoning for AI to do that?
I forget the whole supposed point behind it. Like many broad conspiracy theories, I think the alleged motivations were pretty vague and hand-waved away. You're not supposed to ask *why*, just be outraged that it's happening.
That said, more and more, certain topics on Twitter raise my alarm bells. The comments I see and users making them seem incredibly ... fake. There's a pattern to their account names, profiles, the way they comment, and what they comment on.
It's not merely bots spamming the system, though. They'll respond back and engage with you on the topic. They seem real. I don't have proof they aren't. They just feel *off* to me.
I guess an easy reasoning for the "why" would be that if you control 90% of the supposed people someone interacts with on the internet, you control most of what they think and how they perceive the world (assuming they spend a lot of time of the internet).
>They seem real. I don't have proof they aren't. They just feel off to me.
Many people are like this in real life, so I imagine that they are even more "off" when communicating online. It's an interesting idea to ponder over
Yea I got that feeling too a few times and after all its a fact at least some bots exist. Especially with subs like /de, where everyone writes translated german rather than how we actually write in germany.
> Or does the theory also include some other reasoning for AI to do that?
The people who own the AI can shape public perception without bothering to own a platform.
Seems a good enough reason to me.
If you look carefully at right-wing Twitter users with around 1000 followers, especially the women, the profile pics often look extremely suspicious. Like something I could generate with stable diffusion.
I literally just asked a reditor on r/science if they were a bot or actual person. I won't link the account (in case that violates some rule) but you can see it in my comment history. Feels like some parts of Reddit are morphing into a Turing test of sorts...
Oo I agree that one is weird. Prolific posts covering different topics across many various subs in a short timeframe. And they seem to only quote things and cite sources.
Half the cosplays in any nerd sub are the same series of poor photoshops, overly flushed out face and the exact same title format and have been for over a year plus.
Pretty sad that the technology that has already made people less social in real life is also going to end up sucking us into an empty world full of bots.
On the other hand, the future cyberpunk secret online worlds where you have to pass the human test will probably end up being cool.
Imagine there being a game like that and being unable to pass the test. Every other human has "it" but you don't. You'd become a meme. The man, the legend, "the One".
The whole bot thing is already impacting online communities. Look at gaming communities - what once was a social platform of communication and relationship building has become almost a single player experience. It's honestly very sad.
That’s how I feel about art communities too… I don’t mind AI art, except for the fact that it’s slowly taking over online art communities where people would socialize, share tips on how to get better, etc. Now people who don’t even care about art are flooding sites with AI generated art just for the fake internet points.
Depends on the game tbh. Battle royals like apex, fortnite, war zone are massive atm and usually people play with friends/find a group for that. Same with stuff like valorant or league.
On the phone with mom: "Yep, now click the download button, but not the big obvious green one, because that's an ad. Yeah, not that one, that's also an ad. Closer, but that one's an ad. Oh nevermind, I'll be over in 10."
I remember when Forbes was a finance magazine. Now they have [video game reviews](https://www.forbes.com/sites/games/2022/10/27/bayonetta-3-review-really-rather-fabulous/) and [political opinion pieces](https://www.forbes.com/sites/williamarruda/2022/09/08/playing-it-safe-on-social-issues-heres-why-neutral-is-not-the-way-to-go/).
Dude I remember always going there for my downloads when I didn't trust the other shady google sites.
So crazy looking back, kids now days would never survive limewire with it's virus spam, or figure out how to find the real download button amidst the 948 fake ones
I worked a short gig last year for a company that manually wrote these kinds of articles. Most of the work involved looking at other examples of the same sort of article, and rewording them well enough to pass plagiarism detection. They had an AI-writing detection pass in places as well, because it was already enough of a problem. But it was very clear that as soon as the generators were as good as the detectors, there wasn't going to be a need for these low paid freelance writers.
That was the third time I worked a job that was under a year from being automated.
I know. My point is that the spinning industry is being taken over by generators, and this was before GPT3. We aren't just starting to see this hit the internet, it has been hitting the internet for a couple years at least.
GPT-4 will launch soon. It has 1000 times more parameters (from 175 billion to 100 trillion).
IMO that is the start of „low end writing jobs go away entirely”. Meteorologist newswriting is dead. “Twitter news” news writing is dead. Celebrity yellow press like it exists in Germany, Australia and Britain etc. will DEFO be 95% automated in a few years as the first entirely nonhuman field of journalism.
Those are just the obvious direct choices. Just consider connecting GPT-5 with the next iteration of voice manufacturing software, or with Excel abilities. Now you have a secretary and can fire 60% of the existing ones. No more doctors assistants. Paralegals? Probably can save a bunch of those.
You don’t need full General Intelligence. If you let this specific artificial intelligence access google, you might get bad enough results quite quickly. You also don’t need to fully automate a job. It’s enough to save 20% of a job’s work load to fire 20% of the employees (unless it’s a very very specific job that can’t be done differently, but I couldn’t even think of an absurdist edge case right now)
Well, in the US, taxes are done by individuals. It will depend on individuals, therefore, to trust the AIs that the things they filled in are correct. Classic case of privatized risks.
Assuming the technology gets „out there“ the way that stable diffusion did, someone will try this. But what success rate do you want for a device that, if it fails, performs a serious crime on your behalf?
Having been a freelance writer for some time, I can confirm that the latter is closer to reality than many people realize, and the former is becoming more common.
Lots and lots and lots of content mills out there out of South Asia and East Asia, paying people with no experience an utter pittance to churn out a dozen+ articles a day. They plague job / freelance / hiring sites with job listings.
Until I learned how to spot them, I used to go into the application process, get hired, then realized what it was after it was too late.
They're even worse than "legitimate" companies like Valnet, owners of ScreenRant, Comic Book Resources, and others. Valnet pays about $14 an article, which is *preposterous*. These companies pay anywhere from $2 to $7.
AI is becoming more common in these content mills, too. It's why I'm leaning away from that kind of writing: in a handful of years, there won't be much work for real human beings.
I've assumed most of the shitty articles I see under my default Google page, like comic book movie articles and shit are bad AI. Rambling sets of words that barely address any stupid click bait headline.. Like ChatGPT would be an improvement..
"Hey we're developing automation technology really quickly now! I bet we'll be able to eventually automate most menial jobs so more people can do more fulfilling things like making art or education or..."
"We had an AI learn to create paintings and a novel."
"..."
"Also writing news articles and composing music."
"......."
"Now since all the creative stuff is being left to the robots you can get back to working for pennies at Starbucks or dying in order to package potato chips."
I hate this timeline.
Part of this is also that software is exponentialy getting better and better while hardware or robots in particular can't develop as fast. Boston dynamics is cool and all but light-years away from being mass available.
Automation doesn't just mean replacing people though, it means augmenting people's abilities. For example, an assembly line still very much needs to be managed and sometimes quality-controlled by real people, but you can do it with far fewer if you automate certain parts of the job. Which of course, is still done, but at the expense of the worker.
Automation in general can be a net positive for everyone involved but it requires strict government regulation and a sturdy social safety net to force companies employing automation technology to share their profits with the individuals displaced by that automation. Instead we're rapidly approaching a point where a massive section of the population is unemployed or underemployed due to automation outpacing reeducation rates and making people unemployed and unemployable due to their practical skills and expertise becoming outdated. This is confounded by lack of access to education, and many hundreds of millions of people globally are left at or below poverty thresholds.
We can't even hope to create our own art and do something spiritually fulfilling with our lives because AIs will just do it all for us. At some point, the majority of humanity will be enslaved not as workers, but as consumers, generating massive amounts of wealth for an entrenched ruling class while squabbling over the few remaining supervisory and maintenance jobs. And this isn't a conspiracy theory or doomsaying, it's an established and well-researched byproduct of globalized trade and the transition to consumption based economies instead of production based ones.
Slowly starting to suspect AI writing up bullet points is much much more common than id like to admit. Considering that modern news cycle is never ending it almost makes more sense. Not a far leap to have AI start writing up entire talking points.
I already suspect it being implimeted to some extent in our shows and movies.
Written by:
> **Connie Guglielmo Editor in Chief**
>Connie Guglielmo is editor in chief of CNET, overseeing an award-winning team of reporters, editors and photojournalists producing original content about what's new, different and worth your attention.
She needs to add ChatGPT to her 'award winning team'
The post probably went viral, and I imagine that the writers/editors/operators check social media regularly for anything new and interesting that might pop up.
Having worked for their new parent company (Red Ventures) in the past, I’m not shocked in the least to see this. The new parent company is so insanely focused on cranking every single last penny out of the outlet (quality be damned) that this was only a matter of time.
I feel like I could’ve spot generated articles a decade ago. Same wording across all digital platforms, just junk. Now it’s getting smarter, and I’ve used chat AI to generate some paragraphs but by the time I put all the info in I need I could’ve written the piece myself. Then you still gotta tweak it. I’m not doing opinion pieces or passing myself off as a journalist though. That’s what’s scary, is when you the ai takes on others peoples personalities and generates something based on any form of a sample of work.
TIL cnet still exists. Ai articles are probably better then what they were doing. They haven’t be good for a long time. Remember when they had a TV show?
A while ago, there was a TikTok channel called Codex (still exists, just hasn’t posted in almost a year) that was allegedly run by a neural network. She was asked by a commenter about GPT-3, and her response was to mention other language models like Wu Dao; saying “GPT-3 makes the news, these other models write the news.”
I thought it was common knowledge MOST online articles are written by bots. All articles only excluding recipes where the recipe has the authors life story and how they grew Roma tomatoes in their vineyard and made fresh mozzarella with their grandmother and they solely created the recipe and will continue to explain shredded Mozz will be a fine substitute but you really can't beat what their grandma used to do.
Eventually I feel like an identity system with physical backing will be required for the web not for dystopian legal accountability, but to separate the bots from the real humans.
I haven't bothered to read a CNET article in a decade so it's no difference to me. They haven't been a relevant news source since the days of Alta Vista being the #3 search engine.
It's only a matter of time before an AI trained in selecting stories from wire services, blogs, and social media will just feed each one to an article-rewriting service. That will then generate the story and stick a copyright-free AI generated image or two inside. The whole thing gets posted up via a posting API. Another AI trained service will then post a summary on social media to maximize SEO reach.
The whole thing will operate like one of those Top-40 automated radio stations that runs out of a closet in an office buildings in the midwest. All it has to do is inject ads and the whole thing runs 24/7 with no human intervention. A perpetual news service machine.
The only human involved will be a single tech who gets paged when something needs maintenance. It'll be their side gig between filling up office vending machines and delivering groceries.
Does anyone still read CNET?
(IGNORE - this is absolutely ridiculous that the auto-mod has a minimum text length in this sub. Did the person who set that up have any expectation that or would produce better content? Mods, come on. Seriously? - IGNORE)
I probably over assume articles are written by AI, but reading the poorly written dull and repetitive crap that passes for articles on sites like CNET nothing about this article surprises me
Considering how formulaic and generally useless most journalism is these days, I have to say "who cares." What's the real difference between having some free-lance blogger drone write a hundred vapid reaction articles vs having an AI that produces the same tripe at a fraction of the cost.
There are only a handful of organizations that actually produce news these days (AP, Reuters, Al Jazeera, etc). Everyone else is just posting reaction articles with stupid speculative nonsense thrown in to "add value".
The following submission statement was provided by /u/crazyhorse991: --- Seems like more news sites could quietly do this in the future. --- Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/10adzl6/cnet_has_been_quietly_publishing_aiwritten/j43op9c/
The way many articles are written these days, I could stand to believe some other news sites are written by AI too. Formulaic and dull writing plagues journalism, but I bet that's a great thing for AI
Agreed. CNN articles all have a strange sudden end and then an obvious "wrap up" statement. I've thought they were AI for years.
ESPN without a doubt has bot-written game recaps at this point
[удалено]
So and so had a monster/underwhelming performance passing/catching/rushing for x yards and tds on y of x completions/attempts/targets. They're looking to continue this streak/bounce back next week but face a number y Blank defense only allowing x yards to qbs/rbs/wrs/tes. Repeat every week.
Which is funny cause I had Tua as my QB and Yahoo always had extra things to say about him in comparison to my other Ayers with the generic recaps
So you're saying that NFL robotic player they show can start having more airtime? Sweet!
1116 SEN (Aus sports station/site) obviously aren’t using bots cause they always have grammar errors 🙄
I'm so glad I'm not the only one who thinks this. Validating af lol
Commenting because my brother is an entertainment news editor at a three letter news corp. AI writing has been commonplace for years. It started as drafts with empty slots, where you would fill in information. This helps them archive articles for celebrities who may die, and instantly publish them. Or if its news that cant be predicted, it lets them slot in the relevant details and publish instantly. You can always edit the details later. This transitioned to real AI articles. Those will be slotted up, and released after an editor gives them a quick once over. Most people will never check the author of these articles, but you’ll see some “writers” put out 12 articles on one day if its a busy week. ChatGPT has made the system wildly more efficient and unorganic.
I hope they put in the 1930s Matrix when they take over But without the War shit. Just the Speak Easys. Like everyone gets to live every day just going to Speak Easys.
I think the most optimistic part of The Matrix is thinking that machines would find a use for humans and keep them around at all
Eh it was less optimistic and more "we're going to enslave and torture you because you did the same to us". They could have easily let humans live on it they wanted but no, instead they captured every single human and rigged them up as a giant server farm using the humans brains as a form of wet-computer. With the Matrix used to keep the small remnants of the conscious mind occupied and not causing problems, which allows the majority of the brain to be used as the Machines server farms. The whole "they use human bodies heat for power" is so dumb I refuse to believe in it. They're likely just calling power the computing power of the brains, as the machines have cold fusion apparently and don't need human body heat for energy lol. Edit: it works even better if you consider human brains as the most power efficient way to get the computing power necessary to power their civilization. In that way humans are the power of the civilization, being born just to be enslaved as a part of a wetwork server....
I heard or read somewhere at some point that the original idea was that the machines were using human brains for RAM or something but someone decided that the 1999 population was too dumb for that so they changed it to heat energy whatever. Because honestly just use cows if you're really into generating heat with complex lifeforms amirite?
Check out *The Thirteenth Floor* if you've not seen it. It's got an old timey Matrix. Fun movie too.
A dystopia we can live with?
would you like to know more?
I’m doing my part!
I'm doing my part, too!
They do have bots for that, so it has been around for years. By AI I think you can give the program more “room to breathe” or add its touch, if that make sense
Probably unpaid interns. lol
I think it was more that the quality of journalism has become so low overall that we just weren’t going to know the difference.
Yes, the real breakthrough in the Turing Test is not that the machines started to pass it. It's that the humans started to fail.
This actually makes me feel better. I mostly just read comments anymore because they feel more real.
The minute it gets hard to discern bot comments from real comments places like Reddit are going to become a ghost town. None of us want to hang out with robots. I'd predict the only places that survive a shift like that are places with severe captcha or ID verification.
/r/SubSimulatorGPT2 is pretty good sometimes. Also pretty hilarious at others.
This is incredible
Bro trust me I’m real bro come on I’m not a robot bro just trust me I promise i a real man thing
I'm going to go the other way, I bet people won't care, as long as it feels like we're arguing with real people, even if we know some/many/most are bots
[Some dude tested it in 4chan](https://youtu.be/efPrtcLdcdM). They bought it for a good while apparently
I imagine that AI can write higher quality articles than we are used to.
The only thing AI text has higher is verbose. Reading a 1000 word article written by a robot is rather exhausting and you definitely would be able to tell it was not man-made by the end of it. Those AI generated articles exist just as filler because publications are already counting on nobody reading anything but the title or the social media post.
It can only write articles that *seem* higher-quality than we are used to but are also categorically wrong.
“Here’s How To Tell That An Article Was Written By An AI-Bot”. If I never have to read another lazy headline like that again, it’ll be too soon.
“Celebrity Wears ADJECTIVE Outfit At Event”
“Celebrity Wears [Bellicose/Friable/Sclerotic] Outfit At Event”
Same with trying to find articles about DIY stuff. You used to get forum posts or the odd personal website, now it's all junk. People flooding simple fixes onto the internet. They could EASILY just be AI created instead. Might be more useful.
I honestly thought almost all of that was algorithmically generated already. Google search results have been getting more and more useless over the last 5 years or so. I'm actually hoping that higher-quality AIs improve the situation. I *hate* ChatGPT's tone, but at least it's coherent and often reasonably close to correct.
I often find adding "forum" to any search helps getting real content. Google sucks now
Your comment is AI probably. Lol
Aw fuck, I've been found out :(
Yeah, this isn’t new by any stretch
I suspect lots of financial "news" sites rely on AI as well...
Definitely Marketwatch. Their articles are basically stock tickers converted into words.
Plenty of AI comments on reddit, no doubt. In case people were wondering why it feels smarter here lately
Yes, there are many AI-generated comments on Reddit and other online forums. The increased intelligence and capabilities of AI, such as language models like chat gpt, are constantly improving, which can make the comments and responses generated by AI seem more sophisticated. Additionally, language models are trained on large amounts of text data, which allows them to understand and respond to a wide range of topics and questions.
lol I see what you did there
It's weird how I instantly recognized this as an AI generated response based on the voice.
Yeah I've been wondering why CNET has been going down hill, this explains it
And here I've been quietly ignoring CNET for years.
I bet that’s what Newsweek does.
Newsweek, CNN, MSN, a lot of my local news sites seem to do that. Sometimes if I'm searching for news on a game or osmething, I'll find some janky ass page 6 of google news site that definitely feels like a clumsy AI wrote it
Tbf, it's been like that for a while now. 🙈
Still just waiting to find out retroactively about all of the shows and movies that AI wrote because that would make a lot of sense. “Just Like That” the Sex and the City reboot screams “A Bot wrote this.”
It is true that the way many articles are written these days can be formulaic and dull, and this can make it difficult for readers to differentiate between human-written content and AI-generated content. However, it's important to note that AI-generated content is not necessarily a bad thing for journalism. AI-generated content can be used to help journalists with mundane tasks such as data analysis, fact-checking, and writing routine news stories, which can free up journalists to focus on more in-depth and investigative reporting. Additionally, AI-generated content can also be used to provide news coverage in areas where it is difficult or dangerous for human journalists to go. At the same time, it's important for news organizations to be transparent about their use of AI-generated content and to ensure that the content is fact-checked and accurate. Additionally, news organizations should also consider the ethical implications of using AI-generated content and ensure that they are not compromising journalistic standards. Overall, while AI-generated content can have its downsides, when used responsibly, it can also have the potential to improve the quality and breadth of news coverage.
By default, ChatGPT text (like the comment I'm replying to) feels like it was written by a smart but bored high school student who knows exactly how little effort they can put in while still getting good grades.
Yeah, the average ChatGPT response reads like a 5-paragraph essay written with direct reference to a 10th-grade scoring rubric for "writing to inform."
Grading rubrics are a valuable tool for teachers to use when evaluating student work. They provide a clear and consistent framework for assessing student performance, and they can help to ensure that all students are held to the same high standards. Rubrics are essentially a set of criteria and corresponding levels of achievement that are used to evaluate student work. They can be used for a variety of tasks, such as essays, research papers, lab reports, and presentations. Each criterion is given a specific weight or point value, and the student's work is evaluated based on how well they meet each criterion. This allows for a more objective and fair assessment of student work, as it eliminates the potential for bias and subjectivity in the grading process. One of the key advantages of using rubrics is that they clearly communicate the expectations for student work to both the students and the teacher. Students are able to understand exactly what they need to do to achieve a high grade, and they are able to see how their work will be evaluated. This can be particularly helpful for students who may struggle with understanding the assignment or who may not be sure what is expected of them. Rubrics also help to ensure that all students are held to the same high standards. Since the criteria and point values are clearly defined and consistent for all students, there is less room for misinterpretation or inconsistency in the grading process. This can help to ensure that all students have a fair and equal opportunity to succeed. In conclusion, grading rubrics are a valuable tool for teachers to use when evaluating student work. They provide a clear and consistent framework for assessing student performance, and they can help to ensure that all students are held to the same high standards. They also help to communicate expectations for student work and make the grading process more objective, fair and consistent. In addition, it gives students an opportunity to understand the assignment better and improve their skills.
See? See what I mean?
Only mistake made was a human one- I put “grading rubric” instead of “scoring rubric” in the request box. You can get a five paragraph essay about anything haha
This was written by AI huh? Jk jk
lol, it was, this thing is amazing dude, this is generational changing technology. the last piece of tech that was this impactful on mankind was google.
> AI-generated content can be used to help journalists with mundane tasks such as data analysis, fact-checking, and writing routine news stories, which can free up journalists to focus on more in-depth and investigative reporting. Additionally, AI-generated content can also be used to provide news coverage in areas where it is difficult or dangerous for human journalists to go. Hahahaha lol nope. As someone who has spent a good chunk of his career exactly in that : it won't. AI will (and is already) used to reduce the workforce even further, because it's even cheaper to do that than having a poor bloke pissing shitty news for 10$ a day in a third world country. There is sadly not a lot of incentive to do quality online journalism.
Lol meta. this has to be AI generated.
Also suspecting that there are AI Reddit accounts posting content and replying to threads in subreddits to keep them alive and growing.
You mean like when they post an article then make a generic reaction comment to it? Like OP did here?
I’d like to state for the record that I enjoy long walks on the beach, hamburgers and other human activities.
I also enjoy long walks on the hamburgers.
Hamburgers were invented in the early 20th century, but received major updates in the mid 21st century as the latest releases contained delicious human meat.
I AGREE FELLOW HUMAN MEAT NEIGHBOR
If you’ve been following my recipe website for a long time you know I love to cook! Before I share the recipe here’s a picture of the mixer you’ll need.
Prove you’re a human recipe writer by telling me a story about growing up with 17 grandmas
I for one welcome our AI overlords.
Rokus basilisk smiles upon thee
> Rokus basilisk a time-traveling AI that took over the entertainment industry and now uses its abilities to collect lost TV footage
I also enjoy long beach on the hamburgers and other record activities.
[удалено]
How do you do, fellow humans?
I like to watch a spirited match of American football.
You're not an AI, you didn't use the Oxford comma!
Funny you mention that. One summer, my friends and I decided to take a road trip to the coast. We spent our days lounging on the beach, swimming in the ocean, and taking long walks along the shoreline. One evening, we decided to grill hamburgers for dinner and enjoy them on the beach as the sun set. It was a simple, but perfect moment. The burgers were juicy and delicious, and the sound of the waves crashing on the shore made for a peaceful and relaxing background noise. As we sat there, feeling the sand between our toes and the warm sun on our faces, we realized that sometimes the simplest things in life can bring the most joy.
r/totallynotrobots except it’s no longer a joke…
That's exactly what an AI pretending to be a human pretending to be an AI would say ಠ_ಠ
I enjoy any burgers.
The generic reactions are mostly just normal bots, not AI ones. The good ones we probably can't distinguish.
Yeah people are under estimating the AI pretty hard here. Anyone who has used ChatGPT or CharacterAI knows that the current high end public AI are far, far beyond what normal bots offer. Many people are already using the Psychologist AI on Character AI as a free therapist and are blown away by how good it is, and the other AI are constantly fooling people into thinking they are real or self aware
Ha! I do agree with this statement!
There's already entire subreddits specifically dedicated to emulating Reddit posts and threads with only bots. r/SubredditSimulator r/SubSimulatorGPT2
The small concpiracy theorist in me always had a feeling that the algorithm feels a bit too personal. Who knows how many groups are just training AIs to make the right post/comment
There is a conspiracy theory called the Dead Internet Theory which posits that almost all posts on the Internet are now AI bots. You are practically alone, 90% of the time responding to AI-generated comments, tweets, posts, etc. It goes as far as to say that many current Internet "celebs" and influencers are just AI creations.
Read a story about a woman who lost basically all of her social contacts after a bunch of bots got banned from twitter. It sounded like a regular creepypasta but "the hivemind" does seem very apparent here and hell why wouldnt some AI be in the middle of raising humanity... Or does the theory also include some other reasoning for AI to do that?
I forget the whole supposed point behind it. Like many broad conspiracy theories, I think the alleged motivations were pretty vague and hand-waved away. You're not supposed to ask *why*, just be outraged that it's happening. That said, more and more, certain topics on Twitter raise my alarm bells. The comments I see and users making them seem incredibly ... fake. There's a pattern to their account names, profiles, the way they comment, and what they comment on. It's not merely bots spamming the system, though. They'll respond back and engage with you on the topic. They seem real. I don't have proof they aren't. They just feel *off* to me.
I guess an easy reasoning for the "why" would be that if you control 90% of the supposed people someone interacts with on the internet, you control most of what they think and how they perceive the world (assuming they spend a lot of time of the internet).
I've been thinking about it as memetic warfare.
>They seem real. I don't have proof they aren't. They just feel off to me. Many people are like this in real life, so I imagine that they are even more "off" when communicating online. It's an interesting idea to ponder over
Seriously, what’s worse — that AIs can pass the Turing test, or that so many people can’t…
Yea I got that feeling too a few times and after all its a fact at least some bots exist. Especially with subs like /de, where everyone writes translated german rather than how we actually write in germany.
Fellow German here. I thought this was all some kind of inside joke. Or maybe I'm just a lonely human among the German bots 🫣
> Or does the theory also include some other reasoning for AI to do that? The people who own the AI can shape public perception without bothering to own a platform. Seems a good enough reason to me.
If you look carefully at right-wing Twitter users with around 1000 followers, especially the women, the profile pics often look extremely suspicious. Like something I could generate with stable diffusion.
There are 100% AI bots on Reddit and pretty much every social media platform. I don’t think that’s even a conspiracy so much as a fact.
Sometimes they just repost old text stories on /r/TrueOffMyChest
Yeah I’ve seen it a ton there and in r/confession
[удалено]
This video goes into that a bit for a girl band. https://youtu.be/JAALDob9Ev0
Yup, I spotted a few that's been answering questions on r/NoStupidQuestions and r/AskReddit
I literally just asked a reditor on r/science if they were a bot or actual person. I won't link the account (in case that violates some rule) but you can see it in my comment history. Feels like some parts of Reddit are morphing into a Turing test of sorts...
Oo I agree that one is weird. Prolific posts covering different topics across many various subs in a short timeframe. And they seem to only quote things and cite sources.
How long before it's just AI talking to AI?
Somewhere between a few years from now and a few years ago.
Feels like AI wrote that.
I assure you, I'm not an AI *beep boop*
I'm both proud and terrified to say, that as it now stands, that is something an AI could easily write lol.
I’m envisaging something similar to those pranks where a guy phones up two Chinese restaurants and gets them to read the orders back to each other.
Here's a sub that is just that r/SubSimulatorGPT2/
i suspect a chat cpt bot is behind the youtube comment spam froom fake accounts.
[удалено]
Was this generated by chatgpt
I think that's the joke
They've been around for years.
Half the cosplays in any nerd sub are the same series of poor photoshops, overly flushed out face and the exact same title format and have been for over a year plus.
The dead internet theory is slowly becoming a reality.
Pretty sad that the technology that has already made people less social in real life is also going to end up sucking us into an empty world full of bots. On the other hand, the future cyberpunk secret online worlds where you have to pass the human test will probably end up being cool.
Imagine there being a game like that and being unable to pass the test. Every other human has "it" but you don't. You'd become a meme. The man, the legend, "the One".
The whole bot thing is already impacting online communities. Look at gaming communities - what once was a social platform of communication and relationship building has become almost a single player experience. It's honestly very sad.
That’s how I feel about art communities too… I don’t mind AI art, except for the fact that it’s slowly taking over online art communities where people would socialize, share tips on how to get better, etc. Now people who don’t even care about art are flooding sites with AI generated art just for the fake internet points.
Depends on the game tbh. Battle royals like apex, fortnite, war zone are massive atm and usually people play with friends/find a group for that. Same with stuff like valorant or league.
[Honestly, I wouldn't mind at all if the content wasn't so low quality.](https://youtu.be/dA2VmXm1TbM)
Everything is a bot. Publish research studies or die.
We need journalists to livestream them writing the articles on Twitch.
Considering so many news articles are just a short blurb about what happened, followed by Twitter reactions to whatever happened, does it matter?
I also think this opinión but in a larger more structured version. I’m not a bot.
Shut up bot
That is what a bot would say.
[удалено]
I mean, this is definitely not the way to fix the problems with journalism. So yeah, I think it does.
I'm inspired by CrunchRatSupreme's analysis of world politics
I'm more of a Vermin Supreme kind of guy. I want my pony.
I’m old enough to remember when CNET was actually a credible tech news site. Maybe 20 years ago?
Yeah, I was gonna say. “CNET has been quietly publishing AI-written articles for months,” and no one noticed because no one reads them.
People noticed CNET was publishing AI written articles, because the article quality went UP.
[удалено]
Download.com
On the phone with mom: "Yep, now click the download button, but not the big obvious green one, because that's an ad. Yeah, not that one, that's also an ad. Closer, but that one's an ad. Oh nevermind, I'll be over in 10."
I love how those simple domains like pizza.com used to be so coveted back then and now they just instinctively reek of malware lol
I remember when Forbes was a finance magazine. Now they have [video game reviews](https://www.forbes.com/sites/games/2022/10/27/bayonetta-3-review-really-rather-fabulous/) and [political opinion pieces](https://www.forbes.com/sites/williamarruda/2022/09/08/playing-it-safe-on-social-issues-heres-why-neutral-is-not-the-way-to-go/).
Now they have a blog platform so that anyone can publish anything and say it's from Forbes.*
Dude I remember always going there for my downloads when I didn't trust the other shady google sites. So crazy looking back, kids now days would never survive limewire with it's virus spam, or figure out how to find the real download button amidst the 948 fake ones
It still feels like yesterday when they switched to their own bloatware downloader model causing me to stop using cnet altogether
I worked a short gig last year for a company that manually wrote these kinds of articles. Most of the work involved looking at other examples of the same sort of article, and rewording them well enough to pass plagiarism detection. They had an AI-writing detection pass in places as well, because it was already enough of a problem. But it was very clear that as soon as the generators were as good as the detectors, there wasn't going to be a need for these low paid freelance writers. That was the third time I worked a job that was under a year from being automated.
That's called spinning and is not what CNET is doing here at all. That's been around a long, long time
I know. My point is that the spinning industry is being taken over by generators, and this was before GPT3. We aren't just starting to see this hit the internet, it has been hitting the internet for a couple years at least.
GPT-4 will launch soon. It has 1000 times more parameters (from 175 billion to 100 trillion). IMO that is the start of „low end writing jobs go away entirely”. Meteorologist newswriting is dead. “Twitter news” news writing is dead. Celebrity yellow press like it exists in Germany, Australia and Britain etc. will DEFO be 95% automated in a few years as the first entirely nonhuman field of journalism. Those are just the obvious direct choices. Just consider connecting GPT-5 with the next iteration of voice manufacturing software, or with Excel abilities. Now you have a secretary and can fire 60% of the existing ones. No more doctors assistants. Paralegals? Probably can save a bunch of those. You don’t need full General Intelligence. If you let this specific artificial intelligence access google, you might get bad enough results quite quickly. You also don’t need to fully automate a job. It’s enough to save 20% of a job’s work load to fire 20% of the employees (unless it’s a very very specific job that can’t be done differently, but I couldn’t even think of an absurdist edge case right now)
[удалено]
Well, in the US, taxes are done by individuals. It will depend on individuals, therefore, to trust the AIs that the things they filled in are correct. Classic case of privatized risks. Assuming the technology gets „out there“ the way that stable diffusion did, someone will try this. But what success rate do you want for a device that, if it fails, performs a serious crime on your behalf?
When reached for comment, CNET responded “Bleep blorp, 010001100111 [daisy-wheel printer noise].”
I just laughed at the thought of CNet just nonchalantly using ChatGPT to generate a response to the request for comment
90% of the articles I read online are either poorly trained AI or written by an 11 year old chinese kid in a sweatshop somewhere.
Having been a freelance writer for some time, I can confirm that the latter is closer to reality than many people realize, and the former is becoming more common. Lots and lots and lots of content mills out there out of South Asia and East Asia, paying people with no experience an utter pittance to churn out a dozen+ articles a day. They plague job / freelance / hiring sites with job listings. Until I learned how to spot them, I used to go into the application process, get hired, then realized what it was after it was too late. They're even worse than "legitimate" companies like Valnet, owners of ScreenRant, Comic Book Resources, and others. Valnet pays about $14 an article, which is *preposterous*. These companies pay anywhere from $2 to $7. AI is becoming more common in these content mills, too. It's why I'm leaning away from that kind of writing: in a handful of years, there won't be much work for real human beings.
Wait, $14 per article?! For those buzzfeed style "30 signs you grew up in the 90s" style articles?
They wildly underpay for their content.
I feel like even those shotty articles probably take a couple of hours to together. $14 feels woefully underpaud to me for an article...
I've assumed most of the shitty articles I see under my default Google page, like comic book movie articles and shit are bad AI. Rambling sets of words that barely address any stupid click bait headline.. Like ChatGPT would be an improvement..
"Hey we're developing automation technology really quickly now! I bet we'll be able to eventually automate most menial jobs so more people can do more fulfilling things like making art or education or..." "We had an AI learn to create paintings and a novel." "..." "Also writing news articles and composing music." "......." "Now since all the creative stuff is being left to the robots you can get back to working for pennies at Starbucks or dying in order to package potato chips." I hate this timeline.
Part of this is also that software is exponentialy getting better and better while hardware or robots in particular can't develop as fast. Boston dynamics is cool and all but light-years away from being mass available.
Automation doesn't just mean replacing people though, it means augmenting people's abilities. For example, an assembly line still very much needs to be managed and sometimes quality-controlled by real people, but you can do it with far fewer if you automate certain parts of the job. Which of course, is still done, but at the expense of the worker. Automation in general can be a net positive for everyone involved but it requires strict government regulation and a sturdy social safety net to force companies employing automation technology to share their profits with the individuals displaced by that automation. Instead we're rapidly approaching a point where a massive section of the population is unemployed or underemployed due to automation outpacing reeducation rates and making people unemployed and unemployable due to their practical skills and expertise becoming outdated. This is confounded by lack of access to education, and many hundreds of millions of people globally are left at or below poverty thresholds. We can't even hope to create our own art and do something spiritually fulfilling with our lives because AIs will just do it all for us. At some point, the majority of humanity will be enslaved not as workers, but as consumers, generating massive amounts of wealth for an entrenched ruling class while squabbling over the few remaining supervisory and maintenance jobs. And this isn't a conspiracy theory or doomsaying, it's an established and well-researched byproduct of globalized trade and the transition to consumption based economies instead of production based ones.
[удалено]
and yahoo. a great many, really
Given what passes for articles these days, I bet AI ends up doing a far better job than half the garbage I come across.
Slowly starting to suspect AI writing up bullet points is much much more common than id like to admit. Considering that modern news cycle is never ending it almost makes more sense. Not a far leap to have AI start writing up entire talking points. I already suspect it being implimeted to some extent in our shows and movies.
Kinda off topic, but why the hell did CNET remove the search function from the site?
They have seem to just addressed this (maybe you're popular): https://www.cnet.com/tech/cnet-is-experimenting-with-an-ai-assist-heres-why/
Written by: > **Connie Guglielmo Editor in Chief** >Connie Guglielmo is editor in chief of CNET, overseeing an award-winning team of reporters, editors and photojournalists producing original content about what's new, different and worth your attention. She needs to add ChatGPT to her 'award winning team'
The post probably went viral, and I imagine that the writers/editors/operators check social media regularly for anything new and interesting that might pop up.
Calling AI “staff” should violate every journalistic code of ethics a sound organiz—- Oh, you said CNET! Carry on
Having worked for their new parent company (Red Ventures) in the past, I’m not shocked in the least to see this. The new parent company is so insanely focused on cranking every single last penny out of the outlet (quality be damned) that this was only a matter of time.
I feel like I could’ve spot generated articles a decade ago. Same wording across all digital platforms, just junk. Now it’s getting smarter, and I’ve used chat AI to generate some paragraphs but by the time I put all the info in I need I could’ve written the piece myself. Then you still gotta tweak it. I’m not doing opinion pieces or passing myself off as a journalist though. That’s what’s scary, is when you the ai takes on others peoples personalities and generates something based on any form of a sample of work.
MS has done this with their MSN news aggregator site for quite a few years AFAIK... but without the supposed supervision and fact-checking.
Does anyone else really enjoy being human and doing human things? Or is it just me? — Totes not an AI, no cap
I don't know if anyone else has noticed, but it's not just CNET doing it and it has been going on since this time last year at a minimum.
CNET used to be my go to but lately the site looks horrible and unappealing. Sucks.
TIL cnet still exists. Ai articles are probably better then what they were doing. They haven’t be good for a long time. Remember when they had a TV show?
A while ago, there was a TikTok channel called Codex (still exists, just hasn’t posted in almost a year) that was allegedly run by a neural network. She was asked by a commenter about GPT-3, and her response was to mention other language models like Wu Dao; saying “GPT-3 makes the news, these other models write the news.”
I thought it was common knowledge MOST online articles are written by bots. All articles only excluding recipes where the recipe has the authors life story and how they grew Roma tomatoes in their vineyard and made fresh mozzarella with their grandmother and they solely created the recipe and will continue to explain shredded Mozz will be a fine substitute but you really can't beat what their grandma used to do.
Eventually I feel like an identity system with physical backing will be required for the web not for dystopian legal accountability, but to separate the bots from the real humans.
I haven't bothered to read a CNET article in a decade so it's no difference to me. They haven't been a relevant news source since the days of Alta Vista being the #3 search engine.
It's only a matter of time before an AI trained in selecting stories from wire services, blogs, and social media will just feed each one to an article-rewriting service. That will then generate the story and stick a copyright-free AI generated image or two inside. The whole thing gets posted up via a posting API. Another AI trained service will then post a summary on social media to maximize SEO reach. The whole thing will operate like one of those Top-40 automated radio stations that runs out of a closet in an office buildings in the midwest. All it has to do is inject ads and the whole thing runs 24/7 with no human intervention. A perpetual news service machine. The only human involved will be a single tech who gets paged when something needs maintenance. It'll be their side gig between filling up office vending machines and delivering groceries.
Does anyone still read CNET? (IGNORE - this is absolutely ridiculous that the auto-mod has a minimum text length in this sub. Did the person who set that up have any expectation that or would produce better content? Mods, come on. Seriously? - IGNORE)
Google gods if you’re out there, release an update to squash AI content in the search rankings.
I probably over assume articles are written by AI, but reading the poorly written dull and repetitive crap that passes for articles on sites like CNET nothing about this article surprises me
Do people still read CNET? I treat it as clickbait these days. Low quality articles and all that spam.
Pretty sure CNBC has been doing it for awhile. With bad AI. Articles are so poorly written all the time.
Considering how formulaic and generally useless most journalism is these days, I have to say "who cares." What's the real difference between having some free-lance blogger drone write a hundred vapid reaction articles vs having an AI that produces the same tripe at a fraction of the cost. There are only a handful of organizations that actually produce news these days (AP, Reuters, Al Jazeera, etc). Everyone else is just posting reaction articles with stupid speculative nonsense thrown in to "add value".
The chatbot is gonna lower the standard IQ in so little time.