Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Cyborg)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

CIRCLE WITH A DOT

  1. Home
  2. Uncategorized
  3. At this point, LLM-written think pieces make up about half of all long-form writing in my social media feed.

At this point, LLM-written think pieces make up about half of all long-form writing in my social media feed.

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Uncategorized
23 Posts 20 Posters 0 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • owoday@social.seattle.wa.usO owoday@social.seattle.wa.us

    @lcamtuf honestly it reminds me of this study https://people.psych.ucsb.edu/gazzaniga/PDF/Language%20after%20section%20of%20the%20cerebral%20commissueres%20(1967).pdf

    They seperate the sides of the brain and try to communicate with them individually.

    > when an object was placed in the left hand (right hemisphere sensing it), the speaking left hemisphere fabricated a verbal explanation for why the patient was holding it

    Later studies (60s so could be horseshit) worked with a theory of one side being more of an interpreter.

    owoday@social.seattle.wa.usO This user is from outside of this forum
    owoday@social.seattle.wa.usO This user is from outside of this forum
    owoday@social.seattle.wa.us
    wrote last edited by
    #12

    @lcamtuf personally I think humans have a critical vulnerability in the interaction of being handed a completely plausible thought, whether encoded as speech/electrical signals/vision that once holding it will invent reasons why it is correct. That or we are just lazy haven't decided

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • lcamtuf@infosec.exchangeL lcamtuf@infosec.exchange

      At this point, LLM-written think pieces make up about half of all long-form writing in my social media feed.

      When I push back, I get two reactions. Authors say that it just helps them express themselves. AI promoters say "get used to it".

      I don't think we should: it boils down to asymmetry. Our time here is limited. Social interaction on the internet breaks down if it takes ~0 effort to publish, but readers are still expected to use their own eyeballs and brains to engage.

      So, I feel that we have three choices:

      1) Refuse to engage with LLM writing *no matter if the article makes a good point or not*.

      2) Embrace it and have my agent argue with your agent forever, for internet points.

      3) Call it quits and move to an off-the-grid cabin in the woods.

      mikesiegel@infosec.exchangeM This user is from outside of this forum
      mikesiegel@infosec.exchangeM This user is from outside of this forum
      mikesiegel@infosec.exchange
      wrote last edited by
      #13

      @lcamtuf 4) Reply "That's a good post, but I think a more valid point would be if you could go ahead and calculate this double SHA256 hash with a bunch of leading zeros" ?

      1 Reply Last reply
      1
      0
      • R relay@relay.infosec.exchange shared this topic
      • lcamtuf@infosec.exchangeL lcamtuf@infosec.exchange

        At this point, LLM-written think pieces make up about half of all long-form writing in my social media feed.

        When I push back, I get two reactions. Authors say that it just helps them express themselves. AI promoters say "get used to it".

        I don't think we should: it boils down to asymmetry. Our time here is limited. Social interaction on the internet breaks down if it takes ~0 effort to publish, but readers are still expected to use their own eyeballs and brains to engage.

        So, I feel that we have three choices:

        1) Refuse to engage with LLM writing *no matter if the article makes a good point or not*.

        2) Embrace it and have my agent argue with your agent forever, for internet points.

        3) Call it quits and move to an off-the-grid cabin in the woods.

        sikorsky78@infosec.exchangeS This user is from outside of this forum
        sikorsky78@infosec.exchangeS This user is from outside of this forum
        sikorsky78@infosec.exchange
        wrote last edited by
        #14

        @lcamtuf 3

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • lcamtuf@infosec.exchangeL lcamtuf@infosec.exchange

          At this point, LLM-written think pieces make up about half of all long-form writing in my social media feed.

          When I push back, I get two reactions. Authors say that it just helps them express themselves. AI promoters say "get used to it".

          I don't think we should: it boils down to asymmetry. Our time here is limited. Social interaction on the internet breaks down if it takes ~0 effort to publish, but readers are still expected to use their own eyeballs and brains to engage.

          So, I feel that we have three choices:

          1) Refuse to engage with LLM writing *no matter if the article makes a good point or not*.

          2) Embrace it and have my agent argue with your agent forever, for internet points.

          3) Call it quits and move to an off-the-grid cabin in the woods.

          ruslan@infosec.exchangeR This user is from outside of this forum
          ruslan@infosec.exchangeR This user is from outside of this forum
          ruslan@infosec.exchange
          wrote last edited by
          #15

          @lcamtuf You chose the combination of 3) AND ... ??? 😁

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • R relay@relay.publicsquare.global shared this topic
          • fritzadalis@infosec.exchangeF fritzadalis@infosec.exchange

            @lcamtuf
            You're probably a chainsaw vs. telephone pole away from #3.

            lcamtuf@infosec.exchangeL This user is from outside of this forum
            lcamtuf@infosec.exchangeL This user is from outside of this forum
            lcamtuf@infosec.exchange
            wrote last edited by
            #16

            @FritzAdalis I have Starlink on the roof, but I guess it wouldn't be hard to shoot it off...

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • lcamtuf@infosec.exchangeL lcamtuf@infosec.exchange

              At this point, LLM-written think pieces make up about half of all long-form writing in my social media feed.

              When I push back, I get two reactions. Authors say that it just helps them express themselves. AI promoters say "get used to it".

              I don't think we should: it boils down to asymmetry. Our time here is limited. Social interaction on the internet breaks down if it takes ~0 effort to publish, but readers are still expected to use their own eyeballs and brains to engage.

              So, I feel that we have three choices:

              1) Refuse to engage with LLM writing *no matter if the article makes a good point or not*.

              2) Embrace it and have my agent argue with your agent forever, for internet points.

              3) Call it quits and move to an off-the-grid cabin in the woods.

              dalias@hachyderm.ioD This user is from outside of this forum
              dalias@hachyderm.ioD This user is from outside of this forum
              dalias@hachyderm.io
              wrote last edited by
              #17

              @lcamtuf I don't engage with that shit even when humans write it. I'm sure as hell not engaging when they didn't even bother.

              regehr@mastodon.socialR 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • jztusk@mastodon.socialJ jztusk@mastodon.social

                @lcamtuf

                I don't have to *prove* something is LLM-produced to conclude "this writer didn't bother to make sure that their writing clearly isn't LLM", and then yeet them permanently into the "don't bother" list.

                dalias@hachyderm.ioD This user is from outside of this forum
                dalias@hachyderm.ioD This user is from outside of this forum
                dalias@hachyderm.io
                wrote last edited by
                #18

                @jztusk @lcamtuf This. If they're not saying anything that *couldn't have been interpolated from existing Orange Site drivel*, I don't much care if a human spent time slopping it together manually or used an LLM for it. Either way it's not reflecting any genuine thought and not worth reading.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • dalias@hachyderm.ioD dalias@hachyderm.io

                  @lcamtuf I don't engage with that shit even when humans write it. I'm sure as hell not engaging when they didn't even bother.

                  regehr@mastodon.socialR This user is from outside of this forum
                  regehr@mastodon.socialR This user is from outside of this forum
                  regehr@mastodon.social
                  wrote last edited by
                  #19

                  @dalias @lcamtuf it's making me read a lot fewer think pieces, that's for sure

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • lcamtuf@infosec.exchangeL lcamtuf@infosec.exchange

                    At this point, LLM-written think pieces make up about half of all long-form writing in my social media feed.

                    When I push back, I get two reactions. Authors say that it just helps them express themselves. AI promoters say "get used to it".

                    I don't think we should: it boils down to asymmetry. Our time here is limited. Social interaction on the internet breaks down if it takes ~0 effort to publish, but readers are still expected to use their own eyeballs and brains to engage.

                    So, I feel that we have three choices:

                    1) Refuse to engage with LLM writing *no matter if the article makes a good point or not*.

                    2) Embrace it and have my agent argue with your agent forever, for internet points.

                    3) Call it quits and move to an off-the-grid cabin in the woods.

                    helge@mas.toH This user is from outside of this forum
                    helge@mas.toH This user is from outside of this forum
                    helge@mas.to
                    wrote last edited by
                    #20

                    @lcamtuf When someone needs genAI to express themselves, they aren't. They do not - by their own unconscious admission - have anything to add. They do not have an original thought, nor created something beyond a vague concept. Their input is, in its current form, useless.

                    Until now, those people just wouldn't express themselves at length. We could smile, shrug, and remain friends. Pretend they have valuable thoughts.

                    We may have to just stop pretending. But it's rude. Now what?

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • lcamtuf@infosec.exchangeL lcamtuf@infosec.exchange

                      At this point, LLM-written think pieces make up about half of all long-form writing in my social media feed.

                      When I push back, I get two reactions. Authors say that it just helps them express themselves. AI promoters say "get used to it".

                      I don't think we should: it boils down to asymmetry. Our time here is limited. Social interaction on the internet breaks down if it takes ~0 effort to publish, but readers are still expected to use their own eyeballs and brains to engage.

                      So, I feel that we have three choices:

                      1) Refuse to engage with LLM writing *no matter if the article makes a good point or not*.

                      2) Embrace it and have my agent argue with your agent forever, for internet points.

                      3) Call it quits and move to an off-the-grid cabin in the woods.

                      loathsome_dongeater@toots.matapacos.dogL This user is from outside of this forum
                      loathsome_dongeater@toots.matapacos.dogL This user is from outside of this forum
                      loathsome_dongeater@toots.matapacos.dog
                      wrote last edited by
                      #21

                      @lcamtuf I don't understand the "LLM helped the poor sod whose first language is English express himself" point because every time I read an LLMism like "it is not x, its y" I feel like a part of my soul has been devoured. Bad human-written prose is better than copy-pasting LLM generated text. At that point, the friction of constructing prose which makes your thoughts coherent has been eliminated. No one should waste time reading it.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • lcamtuf@infosec.exchangeL lcamtuf@infosec.exchange

                        At this point, LLM-written think pieces make up about half of all long-form writing in my social media feed.

                        When I push back, I get two reactions. Authors say that it just helps them express themselves. AI promoters say "get used to it".

                        I don't think we should: it boils down to asymmetry. Our time here is limited. Social interaction on the internet breaks down if it takes ~0 effort to publish, but readers are still expected to use their own eyeballs and brains to engage.

                        So, I feel that we have three choices:

                        1) Refuse to engage with LLM writing *no matter if the article makes a good point or not*.

                        2) Embrace it and have my agent argue with your agent forever, for internet points.

                        3) Call it quits and move to an off-the-grid cabin in the woods.

                        kitkat_blue@mastodon.socialK This user is from outside of this forum
                        kitkat_blue@mastodon.socialK This user is from outside of this forum
                        kitkat_blue@mastodon.social
                        wrote last edited by
                        #22

                        @lcamtuf

                        "LLM-written think pieces make up about half of all long-form writing in my social media feed"

                        fourth choice-- get tf off whatever 💀 hellscape 💀 masquerading as "social" media you're seeing this on!

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • lcamtuf@infosec.exchangeL lcamtuf@infosec.exchange

                          At this point, LLM-written think pieces make up about half of all long-form writing in my social media feed.

                          When I push back, I get two reactions. Authors say that it just helps them express themselves. AI promoters say "get used to it".

                          I don't think we should: it boils down to asymmetry. Our time here is limited. Social interaction on the internet breaks down if it takes ~0 effort to publish, but readers are still expected to use their own eyeballs and brains to engage.

                          So, I feel that we have three choices:

                          1) Refuse to engage with LLM writing *no matter if the article makes a good point or not*.

                          2) Embrace it and have my agent argue with your agent forever, for internet points.

                          3) Call it quits and move to an off-the-grid cabin in the woods.

                          atlefren@snabelen.noA This user is from outside of this forum
                          atlefren@snabelen.noA This user is from outside of this forum
                          atlefren@snabelen.no
                          wrote last edited by
                          #23

                          @lcamtuf option 3 is much more rewarding at least

                          Link Preview Image
                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          Reply
                          • Reply as topic
                          Log in to reply
                          • Oldest to Newest
                          • Newest to Oldest
                          • Most Votes


                          • Login

                          • Login or register to search.
                          • First post
                            Last post
                          0
                          • Categories
                          • Recent
                          • Tags
                          • Popular
                          • World
                          • Users
                          • Groups