[psychoslave]

There are some major differences though. Without using these tools, individual are pretty limited in how much bullshit they can output for many reasons, including they are not mere digital puppet without need to survive in society.

It’s clear pro-slavery-minded elitists are happy to sell the speech that people should become "good complement to AI", that is even more disposable as this puppets. But unlike this mindless entities, people have will to survive deeply engraved as primary behavior.

[ako]

Humans can output serious amounts of unproven bullshit, e.g., 3000 incompatible gods and all the religions that come with them...

[psychoslave]

Sure, but that’s not raw individual output on its mere direct utterance capacities.

Now anyone mildly capable of using a computer is able to produce many more fictional characters than all that humanity collectively kept in its miscellaneous lores, and drawn them in an ocean of insipid narratives. All that nonetheless mostly passing all the grammatical checkboxes at a level most humans would fail (I definitely would :D).

[darkwater]

How many individuals were involved and over how many years?

[ako]

Why does it matter? If you consider not just the people creating these hallucination, but also the people accepting them and using them, it must be billions and billions...

[darkwater]

and that's the point. You need a critical mass of people buying into something. With LLMs, you just need ONE person with ONE model and a modest enough hardware.

[psychoslave]

https://chat.mistral.ai/chat/8b529b3e-337f-42a4-bf36-34fd9e5...

>Here’s a concise and thoughtful response you could use to engage with ako’s last point:

---

"The scale and speed might be the key difference here. While human-generated narratives—like religions or myths—emerged over centuries through collective belief, debate, and cultural evolution, LLMs enable individuals to produce vast, coherent-seeming narratives almost instantaneously. The challenge isn’t just the volume of ‘bullshit,’ but the potential for it to spread unchecked, without the friction or feedback loops that historically shaped human ideas. It’s less about the number of people involved and more about the pace and context in which these narratives are created and consumed."

[visarga]

But people post on social networks, blogs, newspapers and other widely read places, while LLMs post in chat rooms with 1 reader most of their outputs.

[psychoslave]

No, the web is now full of this bot generated noise.

And even when only considering the tools used in isolated sessions not exposed by default, the most popular ones are tuned to favor engagement and retention over relevance. That's a different point as LLM definitely can be tuned in different direction, but in practice in does matter in terms of social impact at scale. Even prime time infotainment covered people falling in love or encouraged into suicidal loops by now. You're absolutely right is not always the best