not much substance in the article, sadly. There really needs to be some solid evidence on the mechanism and causes - which would be very interesting and a great opportunity for a follow-up.
Are we dealing pro-AI astroturfing in the lead up to IPOs?
Also noticed this item got shadowbanned off the front page, without as much as a "flag" designation. The pro AI crowd seems unable to face the reality that AI is being used in nefarious ways by the most powerful people, in ways that many were warning about a decade ago.
Eh people don't care if something is true or false they care about the dopamine hit they get from engaging in tribal behaviours that reinforce their freaky belief systems that often aren't rooted in any kind of reality.
I think this type of generated content has the same role as illustrations or newspaper caricatures in the past. It doesn't need to be true, it just needs to express a particular viewpoint.
He isn't proclaiming that, he linked to this study https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1135087 led by Alexis McGuire with Paul Taylor and Sophie Nightingale from Lancaster University, Maty Bohacek from Stanford University and Hany Farid from the University of California, Berkeley - peer reviewed.
not much substance in the article, sadly. There really needs to be some solid evidence on the mechanism and causes - which would be very interesting and a great opportunity for a follow-up.
This is a cheap comment.
He linked to three different studies: https://www.science.org/content/article/ai-chatbots-are-beco... https://www.technologyreview.com/2026/08/25/1140958/your-bra... https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1135087
Are we dealing pro-AI astroturfing in the lead up to IPOs?
Also noticed this item got shadowbanned off the front page, without as much as a "flag" designation. The pro AI crowd seems unable to face the reality that AI is being used in nefarious ways by the most powerful people, in ways that many were warning about a decade ago.
[dead]
Eh people don't care if something is true or false they care about the dopamine hit they get from engaging in tribal behaviours that reinforce their freaky belief systems that often aren't rooted in any kind of reality.
Humans are animals. We are!
I think this type of generated content has the same role as illustrations or newspaper caricatures in the past. It doesn't need to be true, it just needs to express a particular viewpoint.
Ahhh behavioral science…
the word "propaganda" implies there is a strategy at play. He does not have a strategy. He has advanced dementia and cognitive decline.
The fact that AI can create convincing fakes is not why it’s such a powerful tool of disinformation. Other attributes matter more.
I'm sorry to dismiss but this this is low quality.
does anyone really believe this?
> AI-generated faces and deepfakes are rated more trustworthy than human faces.
This is reddit tier slop science.
He isn't proclaiming that, he linked to this study https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1135087 led by Alexis McGuire with Paul Taylor and Sophie Nightingale from Lancaster University, Maty Bohacek from Stanford University and Hany Farid from the University of California, Berkeley - peer reviewed.
Your comment lacks context.
https://www.pnas.org/doi/abs/10.1073/pnas.2120481119
there is some very depressing research on this topic