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

PhysicsForums and the Dead Internet Theory

hallofdreams.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 165 posts

Re: PhysicsForums and the Dead Internet Theory

#41

Post by rapind »

COAGULOPATH wrote: post #27

Something I'm increasingly noticing about LLM-generated content is that...nobody wants it. (I mean "nobody" in the sense of "nobody likes Nickelback". ie, not literally nobody.) If I want to talk to an AI, I can talk to an AI. If I'm reading a blog or a discussion forum, it's because I want to see writing by humans . I don't want to read a wall of copy+pasted LLM slop posted under a human's name. I now spend dismayin…

> If Google added a global "remove generative content" filter that worked, I would click it and then never unclick it.

It's not just generated content. This problem has been around for years. For example, google a recipe. I don't think the incentives are there yet. At least not until Google search is so unusable that no one is buying their ads anymore. I suspect any business model rooted in advertising is doomed to the eventual enshitification of the product.

Re: PhysicsForums and the Dead Internet Theory

#42

Post by Aurornis »

tomrod wrote: post #16
Rodeoclash wrote: post #4

The ShackNews forum: https://www.shacknews.com/chatty was similar - go back in time on on it and you can find posts about 9/11 unfolding.

Ars Technica started with comms forums + this new idea to report tech news. The forums are still there but not nearly the camaraderie of the early days.

> The forums are still there but not nearly the camaraderie of the early days.

I remember visiting those forums when I was young and feeling like part of a big group of friendly people hanging out online together.

I tried creating a new account recently and it had a very different vibe. Felt like the old guard had been established and the forums I looked at were dominated by a couple of posters who just wanted to talk, but not discuss anything.

Some of the post counts of those people were eye-watering.

Re: PhysicsForums and the Dead Internet Theory

#43

Post by jchw »

COAGULOPATH wrote: post #27

Something I'm increasingly noticing about LLM-generated content is that...nobody wants it. (I mean "nobody" in the sense of "nobody likes Nickelback". ie, not literally nobody.) If I want to talk to an AI, I can talk to an AI. If I'm reading a blog or a discussion forum, it's because I want to see writing by humans . I don't want to read a wall of copy+pasted LLM slop posted under a human's name. I now spend dismayin…

Exactly. Why in the hell would I want someone to use ChatGPT for me? If I wanted that, I could go use that instead.

Re: PhysicsForums and the Dead Internet Theory

#44

Post by bee_rider »

kevinventullo wrote: post #23
segasaturn wrote: post #17

Money quote: > There’s also a social contract: when we create an account in an online community, we do it with the expectation that people we are going to interact with are primarily people. Oh, there will be shills, and bots, and advertisers, but the agreement between the users and the community provider is that they are going to try to defend us from that, and that in exchange we will provide our engagement and con…

Ironically, on Facebook itself I am only friends with people I actually know in real life. So, most of the stuff I see in my feed is from them.

I’m only friends with people I know on Facebook, so I’m mostly see ads on that site. There’s a feed to just see stuff your friends post, but for some reason the site defaults to this awful garbage ad spam feed (no surprise really).

Re: PhysicsForums and the Dead Internet Theory

#45

Post by jgilias »

segasaturn wrote: post #17

Money quote: > There’s also a social contract: when we create an account in an online community, we do it with the expectation that people we are going to interact with are primarily people. Oh, there will be shills, and bots, and advertisers, but the agreement between the users and the community provider is that they are going to try to defend us from that, and that in exchange we will provide our engagement and con…

Oh, there are solutions. One is a kind of a socialized trust system. I know that Lyn Alden that I follow on Nostr is actually her not only because she says so, but also because a bunch of other people follow her too. There are bot accounts that impersonate her, but it’s easy to block those, a it’s pretty obvious from the follower count. And once you know a public key that Lyn posts under, I’m sure it’s her.

She could start posting LLM nonsense, but people will be quick to point it out, and start unfollowing. An important part is that there’s no algorithm deciding what I see in my feed (unless I choose so), so random LLM stuff can’t really get into my feed, unless I chose so.

Another option is zero knowledge identity proofs that can be used to attest that you’re a human without exposing PII, or relying on a some centralized server being up to “sign you in on your behalf”

https://zksync.mirror.xyz/kWRhD81C7il4YWGrkDplfhIZcmViisRe3l...

Re: PhysicsForums and the Dead Internet Theory

#46

Post by paulpauper »

Dead internet theory is one of those ideas that keeps resurfacing or being revied with articles like this, even though the evidence is only limited to confirmation bias. It ignores that there are huge parts of the internet that are not dead. I think it's more like the quality of discourse has fallen for reasons that are not clear.

Re: PhysicsForums and the Dead Internet Theory

#47

Post by StefanBatory »

Aurornis wrote: post #42
tomrod wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ars Technica started with comms forums + this new idea to report tech news. The forums are still there but not nearly the camaraderie of the early days.

> The forums are still there but not nearly the camaraderie of the early days. I remember visiting those forums when I was young and feeling like part of a big group of friendly people hanging out online together. I tried creating a new account recently and it had a very different vibe. Felt like the old guard had been established and the forums I looked at were dominated by a couple of posters who just wanted to tal…

> Felt like the old guard had been established and the forums I looked at were dominated by a couple of posters who just wanted to talk, but not discuss anything.

I think this is the case for most places, I'm afraid. I use mainly Discord - there are certainly a lot of servers where I'm purely because I'm talking to people I met there, and I don't even play that game anymore.

There solution is simpler - after time we create private servers or channels for the old guard, but even then the places deteriorate.

It's a thing I don't know how to solve.

Re: PhysicsForums and the Dead Internet Theory

#48

Post by StefanBatory »

segasaturn wrote: post #28
thatguy0900 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Invite only forums or forums with actual identity checking of some sort. Google and Facebook are in prime position to actually provide real online identity services to other websites, which makes Facebook itself developing bots even funnier. Maybe we'll eventually get bank/government issued online identity verification.

Online identity verification is the obvious solution, the only problem is that we would lose the last bits of privacy we have on the internet. I guess if everyone was forced to post under our real name and identity, we might treat each other with better etiquette, but...

My parents use a lot of Facebook - and things some people say under their real name are really mindblowing.

Re: PhysicsForums and the Dead Internet Theory

#49

Post by roywiggins »

simplicio wrote: post #29
jeremyjh wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't give a fuck if its "ok". They are just trying to scrape up some additional ad revenue, like 99% of the rest of the internet.

I don't really get the revenue angle though. The AI posts don't seem to be trying to drive traffic to ads or anything. I really don't understand the point of auto-generating a bunch of AI gibberish under the name of old users on ones own site?

A misguided attempt at SEO?

Re: PhysicsForums and the Dead Internet Theory

#50

Post by yjftsjthsd-h »

segasaturn wrote: post #28
thatguy0900 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Invite only forums or forums with actual identity checking of some sort. Google and Facebook are in prime position to actually provide real online identity services to other websites, which makes Facebook itself developing bots even funnier. Maybe we'll eventually get bank/government issued online identity verification.

Online identity verification is the obvious solution, the only problem is that we would lose the last bits of privacy we have on the internet. I guess if everyone was forced to post under our real name and identity, we might treat each other with better etiquette, but...

> I guess if everyone was forced to post under our real name and identity, we might treat each other with better etiquette, but...

But Facebook already proved otherwise.

Post reply on HN