this post was submitted on 03 May 2025
872 points (97.7% liked)

Technology

69702 readers
2872 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. 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.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works -1 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (1 children)

I disagree. It may seem that way if that's all you look at and/or you buy the BS coming from the LLM hype machine, but IMO it's really no different than the leap to the internet or search engines. Yes, we open ourselves up to a ton of misinformation, shifting job market etc, but we also get a suite of interesting tools that'll shake themselves out over the coming years to help improve productivity.

It's a big change, for sure, but it's one we'll navigate, probably in similar ways that we've navigated other challenges, like scams involving spoofed webpages or fake calls. We'll figure out who to trust and how to verify that we're getting the right info from them.

[–] zbyte64@awful.systems 8 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

LLMs are not like the birth of the internet. LLMs are more like what came after when marketing took over the roadmap. We had AI before LLMs, and it delivered high quality search results. Now we have search powered by LLMs and the quality is dramatically lower.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works -2 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Sure, and we had an internet before the world wide web (ARPANET). But that wasn't hugely influential until it was expanded into what's now the Internet. And that evolved into the world wide web after 20-ish years. Each step was a pretty monumental change, and built on concepts from before.

LLMs are no different. Yes they're built on older tech, but that doesn't change the fact that they're a monumental shift from what we had before.

Let's look at access to information and misinformation. The process was something like this:

  1. Physical encyclopedias, newspapers, etc
  2. Digital, offline encyclopedias and physical newspapers
  3. Online encyclopedias and news
  4. SEO and the rise of blog/news spam - misinformation is intentional or negligent
  5. Early AI tools - misinformation from hallucinations is largely also accidental
  6. Misinformation in AI tools becomes intentional

We're in the transition from 5 to 6, which is similar to the transition from 3 to 4. I'm old enough to have seen each of these transitions.

The way people interact with the world is fundamentally different now than it was before LLMs came out, just like the transition from offline to online computing. And just like people navigated the transition to SEO nonsense, people need to navigate he transition to LLM nonsense. It's quite literally a paradigm shift.

[–] zbyte64@awful.systems 3 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Enshittification is a paradigm shift, but not one we associate with the birth of the internet.

On to your list. Why does misinformation appear after the birth of the internet? Was yellow journalism just a historical outlier?

What you're witnessing is the "Red Queen hypothesis". LLMs have revolutionized the scam industry and step 7 is an AI arms race against and with misinformation.

Why does misinformation appear after the birth of the internet?

It certainly existed before. Physical encyclopedias and newspapers weren't perfect, as they frequently followed the propaganda line.

My point is that a lot of people seem to assume that "the internet" is somewhat trustworthy, which is a bit bizarre. I guess there's the fallacy that if something is untrustworthy, it won't get attention, but instead things are given attention if they're popular, by some definition of "popular" (i.e. what a lot of users want to see, what the platform wants users to see, etc).

Red Queen hypothesis

Well yeah, every technological innovation will be used for good and ill. The Internet gave a lot of people a voice who didn't have it before, and sometimes that was good (really helpful communities) and sometimes that was bad (scam sites, misinformation, etc).

My point is that AI is a massive step. It can massively increase certain types of productivity, and it can also massively increase the effectiveness of scams and misinformation. Whichever way you look at it, it's immensely impactful.