Bit idea: You are Chapo Trap House (yes all of them at once) having to make fun of article writing nerds from The Federalist but have to parse though what's real and what's generated by AI.

[–] InevitableSwing@hexbear.net 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

have to parse though...

Do I have to? That sounds hellish. I assume AI writing (that's been human tweaked) is already a norm for many writers. Using it can save a lot of time and a lot of effort. If you're unethical, immoral, and greedy - why wouldn't you use AI? I imagine any Federalist writer who doesn't use it - does so because they are too vain. Toxic right-wingers are nothing if not vain. They think they are god's gift to humankind.

[–] BioWarfarePosadist@hexbear.net 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The hellish stuff is what makes the bit funny, I would assume. Schadenfreude and all that jazz.

It's still amazing to me that we popularized well tuned chatbots, and it is killing digital human interactions because half the chatbots can pass a turning test while half the actual humans on the internet can't.

[–] InevitableSwing@hexbear.net 2 points 1 year ago

half the chatbots can pass a turning test while half the actual humans on the internet can't.

Holy crap - I never thought of it that way. I've had some odd convos at Bluesky because I couldn't figure out what the people meant. And asking for clarification resulted in silence or stuff that kept me confused. And now I wonder if any perfectly normal posts I've seen were actually chatbots. Posts easily could have been. The future is going to get weirder as chatbots get better and more people get worse.