I think that the ChatGPT technology has been around for quite a while but only recently exposed to the public, maybe to forestall its being exposed by others. I believe Reddit was infiltrated with it long ago.
Yes, there's a bunch of that. Although there is also a lot of computer translation from Chinese too. That doesn't count as real AI. But you know it when you see it, anyway.
Remember when correct the record basically took over politics on reddit? They had a budget of millions. I'm pretty sure those were real people, but no doubt they had tools to automatically up/downvote certain comments and articles, probably as well as tools to automatically generate responses. The loser admins were freaking out about the almost non existent Russian presence on reddit whilst correct the record was totally out in the open about controlling the narrative online, and those fuck tards never said a word about that. I should add, you can buy reddit accounts online. Buy enough and use some tools you could pretty easily control the narrative.
There is a two-fold problem in making this determination. (1) I think most Redditors are not capable of expression beyond the level of a bot, and (2) 95% of the content is simple glib one-liners.
So what the breakdown is between AI and low-consciousness humans is I couldn't even guess, but the far more alarming problem is the human one. Bots can be turned off, but consciousness (AFAIK) cannot easily be turned on.
a) what if others suggest one to count as to distract from perceivable reality?
b) if one "read it", then one consented to the suggestion of it.
AI
a) artificial (suggested) or natural (perceivable)...free will of choice.
b) what if perceivable (knowledge) can be ignored when consenting to "stand under" suggested (intelligence)?
c) INTEL'LIGENCE, noun (Latin intelligentia, from intelligo, to understand)...what if the few utilize "intelligence" agencies to tempt the many to react by "standing under" suggestions?
d) what's the difference between understanding and comprehending?
to demoralize
a) what if the many first have to consent to suggested moralism, as for the few to be able to utilize demoralization?
b) MOR'AL, adjective [Latin moralis, from mos, moris, manner or conduct] + CONDUCT, noun - "leading; guidance"...what if life is being led/guided from inception towards death before others can tempt one to follow leaders/guidance counselors?
looking
What if consenting to suggested information distorts ones perspective of perceivable inspiration? Could others shape looks to distract one from seeing?
I think that the ChatGPT technology has been around for quite a while but only recently exposed to the public, maybe to forestall its being exposed by others. I believe Reddit was infiltrated with it long ago.
Yes, there's a bunch of that. Although there is also a lot of computer translation from Chinese too. That doesn't count as real AI. But you know it when you see it, anyway.
at least 50/50, same with anything contentious on Facebook and other normie social media.
I'd say about 80% are AI at this point
They don't even have to be bots. I remember when there were ads posted on r/conspiracy. These days they just say marketing.
Remember when correct the record basically took over politics on reddit? They had a budget of millions. I'm pretty sure those were real people, but no doubt they had tools to automatically up/downvote certain comments and articles, probably as well as tools to automatically generate responses. The loser admins were freaking out about the almost non existent Russian presence on reddit whilst correct the record was totally out in the open about controlling the narrative online, and those fuck tards never said a word about that. I should add, you can buy reddit accounts online. Buy enough and use some tools you could pretty easily control the narrative.
There is a two-fold problem in making this determination. (1) I think most Redditors are not capable of expression beyond the level of a bot, and (2) 95% of the content is simple glib one-liners.
So what the breakdown is between AI and low-consciousness humans is I couldn't even guess, but the far more alarming problem is the human one. Bots can be turned off, but consciousness (AFAIK) cannot easily be turned on.
a) what if others suggest one to count as to distract from perceivable reality?
b) if one "read it", then one consented to the suggestion of it.
a) artificial (suggested) or natural (perceivable)...free will of choice.
b) what if perceivable (knowledge) can be ignored when consenting to "stand under" suggested (intelligence)?
c) INTEL'LIGENCE, noun (Latin intelligentia, from intelligo, to understand)...what if the few utilize "intelligence" agencies to tempt the many to react by "standing under" suggestions?
d) what's the difference between understanding and comprehending?
a) what if the many first have to consent to suggested moralism, as for the few to be able to utilize demoralization?
b) MOR'AL, adjective [Latin moralis, from mos, moris, manner or conduct] + CONDUCT, noun - "leading; guidance"...what if life is being led/guided from inception towards death before others can tempt one to follow leaders/guidance counselors?
What if consenting to suggested information distorts ones perspective of perceivable inspiration? Could others shape looks to distract one from seeing?
Idk why don’t you tell us, since you’re part of a shill farm that actively utilizes AI in hate and shizo larps.
How many fake accounts does your firm control?
Exactly lmao.