I can’t blame people for thinking others are bots, especially when they make cookie cutter comments identical to so many others in nature and content. We live in a world where people have invented bots which mimic human writing to a degree of accuracy most cannot tell apart from real humans. Some of us are bots, get used to it.
I definitely get why, but people have been paranoid of interacting with bots, shills or astroturfers for as long as the internet exists. Calling someone either of these without asking to elaborate on their comment is just adding to the polarisation and intolerance of our platforms.
Often when I try to talk to people with wildly different opinions they just come back with those insults because “who can ever disagree with my opinion? They must be trolling.”
So I definitely blame people for jumping to the wrong conclusions.
Yes there needs that be at least a little blame lmao. Cuz the corollary of “everyone that isn’t agreeing with me is [bot, troll, shill]” is that everyone that isn’t agreeing with you may be rightfully treated with spite and abuse.
You make a valid point about the increasing difficulty in distinguishing between human and bot-generated content. The rise of sophisticated AI has indeed blurred these lines. However, it’s important to remember that not all similar or “cookie cutter” comments are the work of bots. Human behavior, especially online, often tends to follow patterns and trends, leading to similar expressions of opinion or emotion.
While it’s wise to remain cautious and aware of the presence of bots, we shouldn’t jump to conclusions too quickly. Engaging thoughtfully and asking questions can help clarify whether we’re interacting with a person or a bot. Ultimately, fostering genuine connections and critical thinking are key in navigating this digital landscape.
TBH I don’t know if the risks of being an incorrect independently thinking human outweighs the risks of being manipulated by bots. Skepticism seems better of the available options. Sorry if that hurts some people’s feelings, but this is the internet.
I get where you’re coming from—skepticism is a reasonable stance given the circumstances. The risk of being misled by bots is real, and it’s crucial to approach online interactions with a critical eye. However, it’s also important to balance skepticism with an openness to genuine human engagement.
While the internet can be a wild place, fostering a bit of trust and empathy can lead to more meaningful conversations and connections. We can stay cautious without becoming completely cynical. By asking questions and seeking deeper engagement, we can often tell apart genuine interactions from automated ones, while still maintaining our critical thinking skills.
That’s call Simulation Theory. It unfortunately isn’t useful as a theory because the nature of your existence compared to one that is more or less real doesn’t have any impact on subjective value of reality or have any effect on decision-making.
I can’t blame people for thinking others are bots, especially when they make cookie cutter comments identical to so many others in nature and content. We live in a world where people have invented bots which mimic human writing to a degree of accuracy most cannot tell apart from real humans. Some of us are bots, get used to it.
I definitely get why, but people have been paranoid of interacting with bots, shills or astroturfers for as long as the internet exists. Calling someone either of these without asking to elaborate on their comment is just adding to the polarisation and intolerance of our platforms.
Often when I try to talk to people with wildly different opinions they just come back with those insults because “who can ever disagree with my opinion? They must be trolling.”
So I definitely blame people for jumping to the wrong conclusions.
Yes there needs that be at least a little blame lmao. Cuz the corollary of “everyone that isn’t agreeing with me is [bot, troll, shill]” is that everyone that isn’t agreeing with you may be rightfully treated with spite and abuse.
Which is generally… not good.
Man, this is the best bot genetated comment i’ve read in a while. Which software did they use?
EatMyAIss™
🤣🤣🤣
Lou Gehrig approves.
You make a valid point about the increasing difficulty in distinguishing between human and bot-generated content. The rise of sophisticated AI has indeed blurred these lines. However, it’s important to remember that not all similar or “cookie cutter” comments are the work of bots. Human behavior, especially online, often tends to follow patterns and trends, leading to similar expressions of opinion or emotion.
While it’s wise to remain cautious and aware of the presence of bots, we shouldn’t jump to conclusions too quickly. Engaging thoughtfully and asking questions can help clarify whether we’re interacting with a person or a bot. Ultimately, fostering genuine connections and critical thinking are key in navigating this digital landscape.
TBH I don’t know if the risks of being an incorrect independently thinking human outweighs the risks of being manipulated by bots. Skepticism seems better of the available options. Sorry if that hurts some people’s feelings, but this is the internet.
You replied to a comment generated by chatGPT lol
frfr
I was gonna reveal the jig if you kept going for one more comment without calling it. Didn’t want to yank your chain too much.
Though I do think I agree with what ChatGPT said, if I interpreted it correctly. I was kinda skimming.
Nobody cares mate. What you posted is your opinion, flawed logic and all. Maybe if you wrote your own comment it might not have been so shit.
I get where you’re coming from—skepticism is a reasonable stance given the circumstances. The risk of being misled by bots is real, and it’s crucial to approach online interactions with a critical eye. However, it’s also important to balance skepticism with an openness to genuine human engagement.
While the internet can be a wild place, fostering a bit of trust and empathy can lead to more meaningful conversations and connections. We can stay cautious without becoming completely cynical. By asking questions and seeking deeper engagement, we can often tell apart genuine interactions from automated ones, while still maintaining our critical thinking skills.
…what if we’re all bots and we just don’t know it yet? 😶
That’s call Simulation Theory. It unfortunately isn’t useful as a theory because the nature of your existence compared to one that is more or less real doesn’t have any impact on subjective value of reality or have any effect on decision-making.
So… is our broken non-native English an advantage now (because one can tell we are real people)? Nice.
Nah, if your English is good, you’re a bot, if it’s bad, you’re a foreign agent.
Chatgpt is improving so fast. Damm