[intended]

Underrated take.

Yeah, the “blast radius” for social media AI slop is 80%-99% of humanity. There’s many times even I cannot make out if something is slop.

Hell, AI slop is going to be even better than reality for a portion of humanity, so it’s More likely they will stay online.

[81AB24FB]

A sufficient number of people are satisfied with human slop. That the new slop comes from LLMs makes no difference.

In the same direction, if you can't cell the AI slop from the low-quality human output, does the source matter?

The problem is quantity. Has been for a while, the robots are only making it more obvious.

[intended]

I used to deal with what you call human slop, and had many ways to identify and curtail it. However, with AI slop, I can’t distinguish between assisted posts, thoughtful posts, human posts, effort posts, or crap posts.

The direction matters. Yes Quantity is its own quality.

Communities are intended for human interaction - we encode far too much in the social affordances we use. Criticism, votes, lack of attention, all of it is feedback for people to learn and adapt from.

Bots are one way comms. Anyone trying to communicate with a bot is no longer having a conversation, they’re doing some interpretive dance.