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

Dead Internet Theory

kudmitry.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

611–620 of 735 posts

Re: Dead Internet Theory

#611

Post by bombcar »

spicyusername wrote: post #522
seiferteric wrote: post #116

My parents were tricked the other day by a fake youtube video of "racist cop" doing something bad and getting outraged by it. I watch part of the video and even though it felt off I couldn't immediately tell for sure if it was fake or not. Nevertheless I googled the names and details and found nothing but repostings of the video. Then I looked at the youtube channel info and there it said it uses AI for "some" of the…

divisiveness this kind of stuff will create I'm pretty sure we're already decades in to the world of "has created". Everyone I know has strong opinions on every little thing, based exclusively their emotional reactions and feed consumption. Basically no one has the requisite expertise commensurate with their conviction, but being informed is not required to be opinionated or exasperated. And who can blame them (us).…

I honestly think it might be downstream of individualized mass-market democracy; each person is tasked with fully understanding the world as it is so they can make the correct decisions at all level of voting, but ain't nobody got time for that.

So we emotionally convince ourselves that we have solved the problem so we can act appropriately and continue doing things that are important to us.

The founders recognized this problem and attempted to setup a Republic as an answer to it; so that each voter didn't have to ask "do I know everything about everything so I can select the best person" and instead were asked "of this finite, smaller group, who do I think is best to represent me at the next level"? We've basically bypassed that; every voter knows who ran for President last election, hardly anyone can identify their party's local representative in the party itself (which is where candidates are selected, after all).

Re: Dead Internet Theory

#612

Post by vitaflo »

bigmeme wrote: post #607
spicyusername wrote: post #522

Earlier quoted context omitted.

divisiveness this kind of stuff will create I'm pretty sure we're already decades in to the world of "has created". Everyone I know has strong opinions on every little thing, based exclusively their emotional reactions and feed consumption. Basically no one has the requisite expertise commensurate with their conviction, but being informed is not required to be opinionated or exasperated. And who can blame them (us).…

> Everyone I know has strong opinions on every little thing, based exclusively their emotional reactions and feed consumption. Basically no one has the requisite expertise commensurate with their conviction, but being informed is not required to be opinionated or exasperated. Case in point: if you ask for expertise verification on HN you get downvoted. People would rather argue their point, regardless of validity. Th…

This has been going on since Usenet. Nothing new.

Re: Dead Internet Theory

#613

Post by vitaflo »

sheept wrote: post #173
seiferteric wrote: post #116

My parents were tricked the other day by a fake youtube video of "racist cop" doing something bad and getting outraged by it. I watch part of the video and even though it felt off I couldn't immediately tell for sure if it was fake or not. Nevertheless I googled the names and details and found nothing but repostings of the video. Then I looked at the youtube channel info and there it said it uses AI for "some" of the…

a reliable giveaway for AI generated videos is just a quick glance at the account's post history—the videos will look frequent, repetitive, and lack a consistent subject/background—and that's not something that'll go away when AI videos get better

Sort by oldest. If the videos go back more than 3 years watch an old one. So many times the person narrating the old vids is nothing like the new vids and a dead ringer for AI. If the account is less than a year old, 100% AI.

Re: Dead Internet Theory

#614

Post by Finnucane »

rmunn wrote: post #198
fuzzer371 wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one uses em dashes

Except for Emily Dickenson, who is an outlier and should not be counted. Seriously, she used dashes all the time . Here is a direct copy and paste of the first two stanzas of her poem "Because I count not stop for Death" from the first source I found, https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/47652/because-i-could... Because I could not stop for Death – He kindly stopped for me – The Carriage held but just Ourselves – A…

Here is an image of the original manuscript page:

https://www.edickinson.org/editions/1/image_sets/12174893

Dickinson's dashes tended to vary over time, and were not typeset during her lifetime (mostly). Also, mid-19th century usage was different—the em-dash was a relatively new thing.

Re: Dead Internet Theory

#615

Post by namrog84 »

rhines wrote: post #591
skwee357 wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember participating on *free* phpBB forums, or IRC channels. I was amazed that I could chat with people smarter than me, on a wide range of topics, all for the cost of having an internet subscription. It's only recently, when I was considering to revive the old-school forum interaction, that I have realized that while I got the platforms for free, there were people behind them who paid for the hosting and the st…

Something that's been on my mind for a while now is shared moderation - instead of having a few moderators who deal with everything, distribute the moderation load across all users. Every user might only have to review a couple posts a day or whatever, so it should be a negligible burden, and send each post that requires moderation to multiple users so that if there's disagreement it can be pushed to more senior/trus…

I dont know if it's true or not. But I remember reading about this person who would do the community reports for cheating for a game like cs or something. They had numerous bot accounts and spent a hour a day on it. Set up in a way that when they reviewed a video the bots would do the same.

But all the while they were doing legitimate reporting, when they came across their real cheating account they'd report not cheating. And supposedly this person got away with it for years for having good reputable community reporting with high alignment scores.

I know 1 exception doesnt mean it's not worth it. But we must acknowledge the potential abuse. Id still rather have 1 occasionally ambitious abuser over countless low effort ones.

Re: Dead Internet Theory

#616

Post by tvali »

I have similar issue - I think in "dead internet", 1) people do not build custom forums for small social groups; 2) rule enforcement does not follow the structure of past where such small group followed deep conduct and 3) in large pools and aggregators of forums and discussion groups, the rules to be followed are like small bots: they cannot rely on the context. I personally use AI on my page for a good purpose, because we actually get on sync - but it's not giving up my creative work; it's proofreading, adding some references and facts and sometime very cocksure of it's style like "people won't read it".

Re: Dead Internet Theory

#618

Post by jayd16 »

Q6T46nT668w6i3m wrote: post #554
adzm wrote: post #532

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're describing Discord today

Bots are a major problem on Discord. I frequently receive messages to buy MMO gold.

That's a flaw in the GP's plan, not a flaw in the observation that Discord is a good example of what they're asking for.

Re: Dead Internet Theory

#619

Post by grugagag »

vitaflo wrote: post #613
sheept wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

a reliable giveaway for AI generated videos is just a quick glance at the account's post history—the videos will look frequent, repetitive, and lack a consistent subject/background—and that's not something that'll go away when AI videos get better

Sort by oldest. If the videos go back more than 3 years watch an old one. So many times the person narrating the old vids is nothing like the new vids and a dead ringer for AI. If the account is less than a year old, 100% AI.

New AI narration is a dead giveaway to us but many people can’t tell they’re not listening to a human. It is very concerning.

Re: Dead Internet Theory

#620

Post by grugagag »

phire wrote: post #426
sheept wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

a reliable giveaway for AI generated videos is just a quick glance at the account's post history—the videos will look frequent, repetitive, and lack a consistent subject/background—and that's not something that'll go away when AI videos get better

I actually avoid most YouTube channels that upload too frequently. Especially with consistent schedules. Even if I'm 100% certain it's not AI slop, it's still a very strong indicator that the videos are some kind of slop.

Content farms, whether AI generated or not their incentive is to pump out low quality high output. Most of their content even it involves a human narrator are heavily packed with AI generated media.
Post reply on HN