Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

G/O Media Incorporating AI-Generated Content

awfulannouncing.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 44 posts

Re: G/O Media Incorporating AI-Generated Content

#21

Post by kubectl_h »

13years wrote: post #2

The internet is going to become bedlam and madness drowning in the noise of auto generated content. This is just the beginning of the unfolding of an enormous set of unexpected consequences of AI. FYI,I have written extensively on other disruptions that are likely coming "We had hoped technology would replace monotonous tasks while leaving us more time for creative exploration. Instead we are getting exactly the oppo…

If I were substack I'd start figuring out how to ban AI generated content on their platform. Trust in content on certain platforms being non-AI seems like a significant selling-point going forward.

Re: G/O Media Incorporating AI-Generated Content

#22

Post by blamazon »

brucethemoose2 wrote: post #10
kotaKat wrote: post #4

I haven't been able to tell because most of the G/O sites I've frequented have been nothing but slideshows and "top X" lists for the past several months reaching new lows of Buzzfeed quality in the first place. Can they really go lower by switching to AI?

Buzzfeed's reporting division was actually good... Pulitzer good. May it rest in peace. But in hindsight, reusing the name of the SEO trash parent was a terrible decision.

To follow this tangent all the way down the rabbit hole, the 'Definite Oral History of Buzzfeed News 2012-2023' is worth a read:

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/buzzfeednews/buzzfeed-n...

Re: G/O Media Incorporating AI-Generated Content

#23

Post by 13years »

kubectl_h wrote: post #21
13years wrote: post #2

The internet is going to become bedlam and madness drowning in the noise of auto generated content. This is just the beginning of the unfolding of an enormous set of unexpected consequences of AI. FYI,I have written extensively on other disruptions that are likely coming "We had hoped technology would replace monotonous tasks while leaving us more time for creative exploration. Instead we are getting exactly the oppo…

If I were substack I'd start figuring out how to ban AI generated content on their platform. Trust in content on certain platforms being non-AI seems like a significant selling-point going forward.

It is impossible. Reliable AI content detection does not exist. You could only implement some heuristics, like some unreasonable rate of content publications.

Authenticity is going to the make or break for this problem. However, I just haven't seen any promising solutions. Theoretically, there won't be solutions as the very intent of AI is to be human like in every way if achievable.

I recently tried a AI art detector while writing my latest - https://www.mindprison.cc/p/ai-art-challenges-meaning-in-a-w... - and found it to be abysmal. The false positives made it completely unusable.

Re: G/O Media Incorporating AI-Generated Content

#24

Post by Loughla »

mkaic wrote: post #14
binjooou wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This why I'm skeptical of superintelligent AI. The output of AI's is essentially lossy, so when you feed that back in as an autonomous loop you get the equivalent of a 100x re-saved jpeg, aka complete garbage. AI's wont have any more useful data to gobble up.

I don't think we need any more useful data for the AIs to gobble up — we just need to make the architectures we train more data-efficient. In my mind, a few petabytes of text, images, audio, and videos from the pre-AI era should be more than enough to train an AGI, we just haven't figured out how to do it yet.

There's a book in that.

AI becomes ubiquitous, and provides media, information, and general assistance and is trained exclusively on content from before AI was on the web. This freezes pop culture in what, the late 90's through the 2020's? What are the implications for that moving forward? Do we stagnate? Do we become so reliant on it that innovation is dying?

I find that idea interesting.

Re: G/O Media Incorporating AI-Generated Content

#25

Post by burkaman »

rideontime wrote: post #12

This is apparently the standard that G/O has for their AI-generated “content”: https://archive.ph/K4BJ7 There is no polite way to describe it. I would call it dog shit, but at least dog shit has some potential as fertilizer.

Wow, not only is this absolutely worthless content, but it's blatantly wrong. They don't even have someone doing a 30-second skim before they publish these.

Re: G/O Media Incorporating AI-Generated Content

#26

Post by 13years »

Loughla wrote: post #24
mkaic wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think we need any more useful data for the AIs to gobble up — we just need to make the architectures we train more data-efficient. In my mind, a few petabytes of text, images, audio, and videos from the pre-AI era should be more than enough to train an AGI, we just haven't figured out how to do it yet.

There's a book in that. AI becomes ubiquitous, and provides media, information, and general assistance and is trained exclusively on content from before AI was on the web. This freezes pop culture in what, the late 90's through the 2020's? What are the implications for that moving forward? Do we stagnate? Do we become so reliant on it that innovation is dying? I find that idea interesting.

It is a similar concept that I touch on a bit in the article I linked above.

In the section "AI dominance, stagnation and human skill debt" which mentions the idea that we could break the cycle of learning new information and skill where there is nothing to fill that void.

Re: G/O Media Incorporating AI-Generated Content

#27

Post by klausa »

13years wrote: post #23
kubectl_h wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I were substack I'd start figuring out how to ban AI generated content on their platform. Trust in content on certain platforms being non-AI seems like a significant selling-point going forward.

It is impossible. Reliable AI content detection does not exist. You could only implement some heuristics, like some unreasonable rate of content publications. Authenticity is going to the make or break for this problem. However, I just haven't seen any promising solutions. Theoretically, there won't be solutions as the very intent of AI is to be human like in every way if achievable. I recently tried a AI art detecto…

Does reliable detection matter?

I think platform holders saying "AI content is unwelcome here", and loudly kicking off violators is more than enough to send the required signal.

The goal is not to have 0% generated content, it's to brand yourself as _the_ source for thoughtful, human writing. Having an occasional article slip under the radar is fine.

Re: G/O Media Incorporating AI-Generated Content

#28

Post by 13years »

klausa wrote: post #27
13years wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is impossible. Reliable AI content detection does not exist. You could only implement some heuristics, like some unreasonable rate of content publications. Authenticity is going to the make or break for this problem. However, I just haven't seen any promising solutions. Theoretically, there won't be solutions as the very intent of AI is to be human like in every way if achievable. I recently tried a AI art detecto…

Does reliable detection matter? I think platform holders saying "AI content is unwelcome here", and loudly kicking off violators is more than enough to send the required signal. The goal is not to have 0% generated content, it's to brand yourself as _the_ source for thoughtful, human writing. Having an occasional article slip under the radar is fine.

When you put a lot of effort into your own creation and then it is rejected because it is flagged as AI, then yes it will matter significantly. 50% of my own art I created is flagged as AI.

There may be an appeal process, but the point is AI will make verification of authenticity painful.

Re: G/O Media Incorporating AI-Generated Content

#29

Post by klausa »

13years wrote: post #28
klausa wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does reliable detection matter? I think platform holders saying "AI content is unwelcome here", and loudly kicking off violators is more than enough to send the required signal. The goal is not to have 0% generated content, it's to brand yourself as _the_ source for thoughtful, human writing. Having an occasional article slip under the radar is fine.

When you put a lot of effort into your own creation and then it is rejected because it is flagged as AI, then yes it will matter significantly. 50% of my own art I created is flagged as AI. There may be an appeal process, but the point is AI will make verification of authenticity painful.

You're misunderstanding what I'm saying.

My argument isn't "imperfect detection is fine".

I'm saying that _you don't need detection at all_.

Just make it very clear that AI content is unwelcome on your platform and loudly boot everyone who tries to "experiment" with your limits.

Re: G/O Media Incorporating AI-Generated Content

#30

Post by classified »

kotaKat wrote: post #4

I haven't been able to tell because most of the G/O sites I've frequented have been nothing but slideshows and "top X" lists for the past several months reaching new lows of Buzzfeed quality in the first place. Can they really go lower by switching to AI?

> Can they really go lower by switching to AI?

Exactly, and at the moment an LLM might still be cheaper than human writers. If you're going to publish hot air you might as well automate it.

Post reply on HN