[eterm]

It is the failure mode of incorrect trust that has changed.

Previously you might get burned with some bad information or incorrect data or get taken in by a clever hoax once in a while.

Now you get overwhelmed by regurgitation, which itself gets fed back into the machine.

The ratio of people to bots reading is crashed to near zero.

We have burned the web.

[lazystar]

I've been miserable over the last few weeks after coming to that same conclusion. Its so bad that i doubt the people that were pulling the strings can even tell whats going on anymore.

[archagon]

If the web is burned, something new will arise in its place (with new constraints) as long as there's a need. It's not like we only get one shot at this.

[joseda-hg]

The constraints being different already make the replacement tangibly different

Maybe it will kill the veil of (perceived) anonimity which tangibly changes how people behave, or maybe the filter will be monetary and the filter will just affect the underclass shifting whatever discourse will be had

We can't act like whatever replaces the current web won't be different, because then there's no reason to change at all

[lazide]

Depends on if someone ends up launching nukes over this, which there isn’t a non-zero chance is going to occur.

This same type of info war tends to muddy, confuse, and get everyone on edge.

[pixl97]

Hence dead internet theory has turned into dead internet reality.

[mycall]

It corrupts future AI models too, so we might be holding onto today's models for a long time, as a least biased version as a checksum.