21–30 of 116 posts
I have started coming across articles that seem legitimate except for bizarre patois used in the subheadings specifically: "How Long Be The Game?" "What Mean By Corner Kick?" which I'm assuming as an AI summarization artefact
Did they automatically detect that it became very popular as it had many people visiting it regularly?
Hints of the new SEO... LLMO? I can see a dystopian future where OpenAI / Bard generate revenue by tailoring the model's output to suit a client's message.
Why do we still read articles? I get the entertainment aspect but it's pretty clear we ll never have to read an article about travel destinations, we will be asking the AI itself, or reddit
Good travel blogs maintained by locals are immensely valuable. They usually have much better technical advice about local culture, airports, payment, SIM cards and that sort of thing.
The article mentions Paris Marx, who runs a podcast called Tech Won't Save Us. I doubt most people here would particularly enjoy listening to it, but might find it interesting to hear from strong critics of the tech industry. Sometimes they raise good points. https://www.techwontsave.us/
Why do we still read articles? I get the entertainment aspect but it's pretty clear we ll never have to read an article about travel destinations, we will be asking the AI itself, or reddit
Only insofar as travel blogs are shallow SEO spam. Good travel blogs maintained by locals are immensely valuable. They usually have much better technical advice about local culture, airports, payment, SIM cards and that sort of thing.
If the locals have written any of that down or recorded it on video, the AI will have consumed it already.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Only insofar as travel blogs are shallow SEO spam. Good travel blogs maintained by locals are immensely valuable. They usually have much better technical advice about local culture, airports, payment, SIM cards and that sort of thing.
> They usually have much better technical advice about local culture, airports, payment, SIM cards and that sort of thing. If the locals have written any of that down or recorded it on video, the AI will have consumed it already.
AI content feels a lot like the copywritten content it replaces: a shallow repetition of what an actual expert wrote down.
That sounds like a surprisingly fortunate mistake, because you would hope recommending others to go to a food bank will encourage (and actually make some of) them to give something to the needy there. The suggestion the AI makes to consider going into it on an empty stomach could help the tourist to empathise with others who are less fortunate, because those are people who feel hungry every day. (Although the suggest…
the suggestion is terrible, full stop. it would be akin to someone standing outside a movie theater yelling at people because they should be spending their time fighting world hunger. sure, they might be right, but its kind of missing the point.
Hints of the new SEO... LLMO? I can see a dystopian future where OpenAI / Bard generate revenue by tailoring the model's output to suit a client's message.
Well, yes. This is what was alluded to about the absolute breaking of shared reality that genAI allows. That's not even touching on the fact that the party that has the most control over a popular used model could filter "undesirable people" out of places they don't want to see such folks.
Hints of the new SEO... LLMO? I can see a dystopian future where OpenAI / Bard generate revenue by tailoring the model's output to suit a client's message.