• ferret@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    I am quite pleased the AI decided to take it to heart when I told it to kill itself

      • Lvxferre@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        Nah. It’s degrading the internet, for sure; but not killing it. We got a similar event in September 1993 and the internet survived fine.

        • dhork@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          At least this time around there is intelligence involved, even if it is artificial.

          • Lvxferre@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            3 months ago

            A lot of the newbies were simply clueless, not necessarily lacking intelligence. Still, they were generating a sudden and huge influx of low quality “content” aka noise, lowering the ability of the [previous] userbase to find what it wanted, and that userbase got understandably pissed.

            And eventually this was solved - some platforms died, some got moribund, but the ones that were able to ride on the new times thrived. And more importantly, the internet as a whole found ways to contain and sort that noise.

            That’s a lot like what’s happening now, except that the agents are not a huge crowd of noobs - they’re a handful of shitty people using LLMs and Stable Diffusion to do so.

        • spujb@lemmy.cafe
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          “similar”

          lol. a massive growth in real, human, users is not “similar” to a massive growth in fake undependable data with zero to negative value.