If this takes off we are so cooked. I'm going to give up and go live in the woods.
this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2025
73 points (95.1% liked)
Technology
75625 readers
2519 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Slop-Tok
great!
So much AI ‘innovations’ are just solutions looking for problems
I hate it when management comes asking something like, "how are we planning to use AI?" instead of "what tools would help you be more productive?" The first puts me on the defensive, and my answer is "we're already using various forms of AI, from machine learning to features our tools have," and that isn't a productive conversation. The second question is more useful, since I'll mention things the asker could actually help with, like feedback from other parts of the company, more budget to hire and promote, etc.
AI might be the right solution, and it might not, but you won't get that answer if you ask the wrong question.
This is happening to a friend of mine that works at a mobile app company. Being very general so it doesn't get back to her but:
They're pushing an AI tool that does parts of her job with the idea that it is something that anyone at the company can access and use. Of course, what that's going to do is give everyone extra work because they'll be expected to use this tool in addition to their usual responsibilities. And it will add to my friend's workload as well becaue she will now need to manage and review everything that everyone else generates before it can go into production.
So yeah same thing, they asked how they can use AI, instead of asking themselves what can streamline the workflows.
The only AI I kinda like on TT are the ones that write jokes, then run a video prompt to speak the parts. Are they good at being comedians? Yes. Are they video artists? No. Do I like seeing Gary the stormtrooper get constantly harassed? Yes.
AI slope + Brain rot. I worry about our generation.
Eh, tiktok was already brain rot.
Not sure it really makes any difference.
And I mean this seriously. People staring at their phones to watch little snippets of shit and endlessly scrolling for more is not healthy.
I am not sure there really is a distinction between "real' or not real to the end viewers brain.
I agree although I suppose using AI may allow for even more distracting and “engaging” videos since they don’t need to follow the rules of reality or time. There can also potentially be way more content produced than is possible with a human population. Ugh.
Slippery slop
I was just thinking how great it would be if Google did the same and moved all the AI content from Youtube to a separate platform.
"Don't mind me, I'll stay with this old crappy human content, you go enjoy the cool ai stuff"👍
I fear this will be an uphill battle for YT. I have this gut feeling that Meta and OpenAI here are employing the flooding the zone strategy to hurt and maybe displace YT. The sheer flood of slop with the occasional enjoyable nugget of content flooding YT from the pAIrates will be harder to filter out, clog up servers, and users like you and I will get annoyed and gradually consume less content. YT loses market share and some new platform can move in for the kill, operated by Meta, OpenAI and/or other such reputable companies. It's not easy to monetize this crap, which is a loss leader at this point. It doesn't look to me like enough people will subscribe to these services to be financially viable. They have to find other ways. So pivot to video 2.0 - this time with so-called AI! Sigh.
If it all goes away, I won't care. Youtube is all about creators and they are the worst. Whatever.
Google is leading the charge with their own video AI
I'm not aware if they have announced a platform for this type of video. OpenAI and Meta have and that's what I meant.
They have their Veo 3 video model
It’s the one that doesn’t have a problem turning black people into monkeys.
I'm not talking about models. That in itself is not a YouTube competitor.
My mistake then
Genuinely who thought AI would be good for creativity? Isn’t the whole idea of AI supposed to be for productivity and sciences?
What the fuck timeline am I living in?
There's a documentary that explains our timeline very well, it's called "Idiocracy".
AI-only TikTok clone
so tiktok basically
Maybe this will make ai art "creators" move to other platforms and leave people who don't like AI alone
Why? Is it just to fuck up the planet with all the energy waste? What would be a logical explanation for this?
Defrauding investors.
In 2024, in the eyes of Microsoft, they saw a demand for A.I. (from who or where, is another rabbit hole). And Microsoft bought a 20 year nuclear power contract. So 20-30 years from today that spent nuclear fuel is fuck that humans will have for infinity; instead of 100% of that nuclear power to have used for any other purpose (cities, battery charging, hospitals, food production, etc)... absolutely anything other than A.I.
Yup, so your answer is in the bottom of that rabbit hole, and it isn't a logical one.
Facebook is already doing this with Vibes
The app can generate copyrighted content
How are they allowed to do this?
it can ensure the content never leaves the app
Really? Isn't is pretty much standard for social media dwellers to screen cap everything they see?
They ensure content never leaves by having it be so low quality that nobody will want to take it away.
The app can generate copyrighted content
How are they allowed to do this?
They can't, based on their premise.
Either they actually can't copyright it because it's AI generated and only human output can be copyrighted, or they're actually using humans to generate the content, which kinda torpedoes the AI only aspect.
Well, they clearly have too much money and have lost the thread. I can't imagine why I would watch such a thing.
I'm going to bet it's to provide training data more than anything.
You should not train on AI generated content.
Also, I expect older generations to fall for this.
Not exactly what I had in mind. I was thinking they could use engagement as feedback to the AI so that it starts producing more engagement-bait type content.
But who would engage? Hopefully not normal people.
actually state of the art models do this all of the time, for example model distillation
Well, they clearly have too much money
They may have a lot of money, but they definitely don't have anything close to a reasonable return on investment. I believe the total revenues from "AI services" are sub $50 billion per year compared to at least x20 times capex and likely a very high amount of opex (hundreds of billion) per year.
Agreed. I would imagine they are looking for new revenue streams because it feels like just running an LLM costs more than the derived value. Right now investors are pouring money into AI by the swimming pool full in the belief that a renaissance is right around the corner. But the view from the ground is that the value is never going to return that investment without getting creative.
And when companies get creative rather than rely on fundamentals that drive sustainable growth, it's generally a steep slope to enshittification.
Meta just launched a similar AI only short video app, Vibes https://about.fb.com/news/2025/09/introducing-vibes-ai-videos/. The bots are gonna have fun and VC is gonna lose a lot of money. I'll all for it.
Sure, throw more shit at the wall, maybe this will stick. I doubt it, though.
Then they have to do it right, everything is fake and all interactions are used to generate new content. Human comments are never shown just used as input.
What does „AI only“ know this context even mean? Only AI content?
Yes and also only AI watching it. Then AI will make statistics on it for advertiser AI to pay them per view.
Does anyone have an archive link for the original Wired article?
Trying do a URL lookup at archive.fo. For Wired there is very likely an archived copy.
Wrong com c/theonion