[JieJie]

In my humble opinion, LLM astroturfing is only a productivity increase over what is currently already a very automated process (social media bot farms, etc).

While this seems like it would exacerbate an already existing problem, it may not have so profound an effect. You see, while LLMs may be able to increase the amount and quality of fake information, fake information isn't currently in short supply, so increasing the amount and quality of it may not have that strong an effect.

In short, we already have 24-hour fake news cable channels and infinite doom scrolls. The bottleneck is there, not in the quality or quantity of fake news.

Now, if they invented a LLM that doomscrolled Twitter and voted based on generated summaries, we would have much greater grounds for concern.

[edit: I hope this doesn't sound too snarky. What I mean to say is that we should fight it by creating less gullible consumers of information, a project in which AI may be uniquely qualified to assist us.]

[jjoonathan]

Human attention doesn't scale. LLMs do. "Git gud" is a losing strategy in aggregate.

[JieJie]

We're talking past each other.

The whole point of what I was saying is that yes, human attention doesn't scale and that is what is going to save us from a deluge of LLM spam.

A billion pieces of fake news or ten, it makes no difference. Humans can only look at one at a time.

[MichaelZuo]

Eventually they'll spend 99% of their time on LLM generated stuff, who cares if it's only 1 at a time?