41–50 of 61 posts
Is 10k followers a lot?
Political campaigns can now afford to target social media users on a 1:1 basis. A bot with 10k followers per month is an old-world threat, detectable with old-world methods. A solitary bot churning out content to the adoration of its fans, of which you are the only human, is the new threat.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I really don’t think AI has anything to do with the current US administration behavior. If not with AI, they would do the same
Really, you think Musk and Bezos and Zuckerberg bought a president and don't have instructions for him regarding their investments in AI?
Full title: "Top MAGA influencer revealed to be AI — created by a guy in India who made a mint off lonely men online". Despite MAGA fans making him rich, he still looks down on them, calling them “super-dumb.” He said he also attempted to make a liberal counterpart for Hart on Instagram, but “Democrats know that it’s AI slop, so they don’t engage as much,” he said. “The MAGA crowd is made up of dumb people — like, su…
Perhaps the easier explanation is not "dumb" but that MAGA crowd is just older and thus richer so better monetizable by definition.
Also, because different groups of people are different by net worth and IQ, we will start (unknowingly) selecting them for either dumb, rich, or both.
Hence the myth that "Americans are dumb" - they of course aren't, it's just that in almost every other country people rich enough to make enough money off them are the elite and thus too smart to profit off them, and only in America, because the country is rich, even dumb people frequently have cash worth bothering. Germans may not be any smarter than Americans, but poorer - thus appear smarter as a group.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That only says those that fall for it might pay more. It doesn’t explain why so many more fall for it.
> It doesn’t explain why so many more fall for it. It's pretty easy: he started out trying to create a "hot girl" influencer, then refined that. It could be his starting point was biased towards filling a certain type of conservative fantasy, but wasn't as easily adaptable to progressives. For instance: it could be that lonely straight progressive men are more neurotic about their sexuality, and thus less-likely to r…
Is 10k followers a lot?
Political campaigns can now afford to target social media users on a 1:1 basis. A bot with 10k followers per month is an old-world threat, detectable with old-world methods. A solitary bot churning out content to the adoration of its fans, of which you are the only human, is the new threat.
I was just thinking the other day how ai will be way worse than social media in terms of influencing people. Before though I was thinking of times people have been convinced by chat bots they were god or a genius. Social media was so powerful because it convinced people their world view was popular and correct even if it definitely wasn’t, but at least then it was actually happening somewhere. This is just completely…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Meh. The Internet has always had a high noise floor, AI here just takes an existing problem and makes it slightly worse.
No, the problem is that AI takes an existing problem and makes it massively worse. Because there is basically no limit to the amount of plausible-sounding drivel that AIs can spew, they can drown out all other voices in a way that regular shills and propagandists couldn't. Even organized rings couldn't produce the same volume that AIs can. Sure, the internet had, say 20% noise back before spam, shills, and propaganda…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I really don’t think AI has anything to do with the current US administration behavior. If not with AI, they would do the same
Really, you think Musk and Bezos and Zuckerberg bought a president and don't have instructions for him regarding their investments in AI?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, the problem is that AI takes an existing problem and makes it massively worse. Because there is basically no limit to the amount of plausible-sounding drivel that AIs can spew, they can drown out all other voices in a way that regular shills and propagandists couldn't. Even organized rings couldn't produce the same volume that AIs can. Sure, the internet had, say 20% noise back before spam, shills, and propaganda…
It never had to sound plausible. AI didn't cause MAGA to believe Haitian's were eating people's pets. AI didn't cause them to believe that schools were buying kitty litter for furries. It's a population who has been conditioned over decades to believe the most wild shit as long as it comes from one of their "trusted sources" and anything that is counter to that is the "liberal media". Fox News et al are far more dama…