Tell HN: Crypto/web3 grifters are Now AI/ML grifters

299 points by alsodumb ↗ HN
I am sure most of you noticed the trend, but a lot of folks online, from influencers on twitter/instagram/tiktok to CEOs of some companies who were big on crypto, web3 (I never understood what that even means) now switched completely to AI/ML with the popularity of DALL-E/ChatGPT.

Me and some of my colleagues are fairly active on the MachineLearning subreddit and we've been getting a lot of unsolicited dms to collaborate in a breakthrough ML/AI project. The conversations start something like this: https://imgur.com/a/z6GUTGc Yup, you guessed it, they have the idea and we have to implement it. If you look into their profile history, you’ll see that they’ve been heavy on crypto/NFT/web3 stuff until a few months ago, some even made good money. They don't even have the dataset. One guy proposed my friend that he has a startup idea to use GPT-model to let people talk to their pets and that it should be 'fairly easy' to finetune from an existing model.

I am already fairly tired of seeing all the ChatGPT stuff on my socials, and I am not looking forward to another few years of more low effort/low quality stuff in peak of inflated expectations phase. I love GPT, I have many pipelines where I actively use it, but I also see the potential where people will abuse it, in every form from increased spam, personalized phishing, etc. Imagine scammers calling your grand parents not with an non-native accent anymore - heck maybe with your own voice (which in my head is fairly easy to do - get someone's family tree, call the grandkid using a model fine-tuned on some local accent, perhaps of the opposite gender and engage them in a conversation - use the voice clips to finetune another model and then call their parents/grandparents to get money, heck even the transcript for the scam interaction can be auto-generated). I am a first-generation college student, and getting my parents to use a smartphone has itself been a challenge - there's no way I can teach them to identify sophisticated scams. I bracing myself and not looking forward for all of this to come.

165 comments

[ 3.6 ms ] story [ 205 ms ] thread
Gotta use those outdated GPUs for something!
No surprise about that and was all expected as soon as Stable Diffusion, DALL-E and ChatGPT were unleashed into the wild.

We already have seen plenty of AI grifters on HN creating clones and copies of AI SaaS and bot offerings with almost no use case on top of ChatGPT with the AI bros selling their snake-oil as "the future" and AI totally replacing everyone's jobs almost just like the extreme crypto maximalists screaming about their utopia of replacing the banking system with crypto coins.

It is another grift for the AI bros, with OpenAI and Microsoft being the winners and can easily gate-keep and price out the majority of these grifter jumping on the bandwagon late, unless Stable Diffusion drives everything down to zero by releasing a better model for free.

But the truth is both crypto and AI are here to stay no matter the grifters and the opportunists. The inevitability on both of these technologies is that the laws will catch up with them eventually.

As someone who is genuinely interested in both blockchain and machine learning, I have seen many people in the crypto space suddenly start acting like they know things about machine learning when ChatGPT came out. Many of them are repeating falsehoods or are unaware of the history of machine learning, including recent events.
As someone who was genuinely interested in distributed computing back 20 years ago, the same lack of awareness of history is extremely prevalent in crypto.

That said, I feel like that's true of people in general, at least in tech (I can't speak to other fields much), and it is extremely frustrating: history is important!

To be fair many of the people involved in crypto today are too young to be aware of the history.

For me crypto is similar to the late 90's where everyone talked about how P2P i.e. decentralised communication was going to change the world. Remnants still live on today up and down the tech stack but that vision never became a reality.

I think crypto will similarly find its way into the traditional finance sector and live on but the utopia of decentralised finance will never eventuate.

> I think crypto will similarly find its way into the traditional finance sector and live on but the utopia of decentralised finance will never eventuate.

To do that it would have to do something, anything, even one tiny little bit better than something in finance.

So far it's like quantum computing. Nothing is better solved with a quantum computer right now. Will that change in the future? Maybe. Until it does they simply won't be used. After all, why would they - except as an opportunity to build in-house expertise in a new space, and for the perception of being hip?

There is no preordained future where it's accepted, it has to earn its spot.

>>> To do that it would have to do something, anything, even one tiny little bit better than something in finance.

To be fair, DeFi offers better returns than are commercially available to the average consumer (granted, with increased risk, but still).

Yeah but those returns are artificially subsidized by VC and retail speculators. They’re, by and large, not the result of non-crypto people or companies purchasing tokens in order to meet direct needs.

A conventional Ponzi scheme also offers very high returns, at a very high risk.

Further, roughly 10% of the entire TVL of the DeFi space was lost last year to hacks and thefts. If you're not getting at least 18% APR (10% risk, 8% inflation), you're better off with series I bonds.

Put another way: if this clear yield actually existed, it would be arbitraged into the dirt by Cumberland/DRW and Jump - not left to the retail schlubs.

> To do that it would have to do something, anything, even one tiny little bit better than something in finance.

I’ve been assuming that one of the companies in that space will pivot to basically modern PKI infrastructure (signed transactions, etc. without 90s baggage like PGP, decentralized only in the sense of working offline on cheap hardware well enough to replace a paper check with a signature using their phone’s secure element) long enough to declare victory and get acquired, at which all of the cryptocurrency sales guys cosplaying as developers will start claiming that’s what they had in mind all along.

>To be fair many of the people involved in crypto today are too young to be aware of the history.

You needn't have been alive to be aware of the history, you could, you know, read about history.

Yeah, it's honestly amazing how people somehow entirely discount the idea of spending any time at all actively going out of their way to learn the history of anything :(.
I'm in this boat too. AI/ML until 2021 and then switched to see if there was anything to this blockchain thing.

Let's just say I much prefer the AI/ML community. The culture there was open to new ideas but wanted to see evidence things worked (leaving aside attention seeks like Gary Marcus). Blockchain is all hype and attacking people who ask questions (although the zero-knowledge community is pretty good).

At least we can be thankful it is coinciding with a tough funding environment.

And that it's far more difficult to bootstrap an AI model based business given the infrastructure costs versus a boring old SaaS one.

What I recently saw is people trying to charge commissions from art generated by AI. Which I guess you can do that but sucks for the actual creators.
Also, usually using many popular artists' work as training data for the model.
Human artists also use popular artist's work as training data
There’s a big difference in how closely most people emulate other artists. Humans tend to want a distinct identify so it’s frowned on to use high skill to make something very similar, and they can only make new art relatively slowly. We’ve never had to consider industrial scale without the ethical concerns before.
My issue is that if someone has a remarkable new style, sure it's going to be copied by humans, but it takes time to do so. And usually the original artist becomes famous along the way -- perhaps even rich.

Imagine a brand new artist who has a distinct style, but yet the art style is used to print 20,000 successful NFT rug pulls. If there was a market, there is no longer one anymore.

I think that's the problem.

What's funny to me is that people are yelling at open source programs. This is a new kind of yelling at the clouds.
There's a major difference of scale. No individual human artist can reliably learn to copy every other artists' styles, and then produce infinite works in those styles.
Some people like to chase whatever is hot. That is life.
Their repurposing their hardware investment. It's the same magical thinking. I wouldn't be surprised to see capital flood into these markets. Capital investors haven't shown themselves to be the sharpest knives in the last few years
“What are you drinking, the water or the wave?”

The Magus, by John Fowles

the fear is not warranted.

current scams are crypto-related. not web3, which doesn't have money written all over it. these scammers follow the money. still curious how they will use AI or ML for scams. the example given does not convince me. and doesn't need any of the current AI/ML advancement.

What web3 stuff exists without crypto?
The original Web3 stuff that came less than a year after the Web2 stuff in the early 2000's, a few years before the web went to 11, two decades ago.

Web3 sounds to me like antiquated nostalgia for something that happened at the turn of the century.

What, specifically, are you talking about?
There was an attempt to make semantic web = web3.0 in around 2009 or so. Eg https://www.researchgate.net/publication/305443181_PROGRESSI... (April 2009)

It didn't really go anywhere.

Web3 now is sort of a thing because one of the main Ethereum client libraries is called Web3: https://github.com/web3/web3.js

So, web3 doesn’t rely on crypto so long as you define the term in a way that’s inconsistent with how it’s basically universally used today?
I think you are misinterpretating my comment!

I specifically said 'It didn't really go anywhere" and pointed at the Ethereum (aka crypto) Web3 library!

I was expanding on @DonHopkin's comment "The original Web3 stuff that came less than a year after the Web2 stuff in the early 2000's".

In my view back then it was dumb (Web2.0 was still a new thing) and was just an attempt by the Semantic Web fans to get some hype. It didn't work.

(For better or worse I work at a Web3 company so I'm reasonably aware of how it is used within that community today)

many?! you think web3 is only about crypto?
Can you give examples of the many web3 projects that don’t involve crypto? If I’m uninformed, I’d need information to correct that.
yes, i can. from a simple search: https://sourceforge.net/software/web3/

it's a matter of understanding here. web3 is a set of technologies (decentralization, blockchains, etc.). once you understand that you know that with or without crypto it can stand on its own. (oh i mean cryptocurrency just in case you didn't get it).

Can you point to anything specific which you’ve actually used which isn’t a cryptocurrency sales vehicle? That page mentions “crypto”, “NFT”, “defi”, etc. many times.
Can you give one (1) example of a web3 project (that doesn’t involve crypto) that you use/have contributed to/know anybody that uses?

Most of the links in that arbitrary search page include crypto terms in the description, and I’m guessing that most (all?) of them include them after clicking through.

You have personal knowledge of many web3 use cases that don’t involve crypto. Do you have a single example?

> Can you give one (1) example of a web3 project (that doesn’t involve crypto) that you use/have contributed to/know anybody that uses?

no i won't. that page is enough for you. who are you?

I’m a curious person! Thank you for clarifying that there are exactly zero non-crypto web3 projects.

Out of curiosity, why are you trying to convince me of something while simultaneously refusing to give a single actual example? You’ve already put in the effort to respond to me multiple times but you can’t type www dot (non crpto web3 project) dot com because it’s too uhh… demeaning? Literally impossible?

You're not a curious person, you've posted anti crypto stuff before, it's in your posting history. Can you at least post truthfully about your position? Being anti-crypto is fine but don't lie about your priors.
The topic of this conversation is about how web3 and crypto are separate.

Are you saying that my being skeptical of crypto means I’m biased against web3?

How could that be the case if they’re unrelated concepts?

Also lol at digging through my post history instead of talking about the topic.

All I'm saying here is that you claim you're "a curious person" but actually you're a biased person. These kinds of fake assertions cheapen the quality of discussion here on HN. Be upfront about how you feel. I'm not here to defend either concept or to engage in another flame war here on HN.

> Also lol at digging through my post history instead of talking about the topic.

Cool have a nice day.

Do you have an example of a non-crypto web3 project or are you literally just here to contribute “I don’t like you”?
What are you asking for exactly? Projects that see use but don't have a cryptocurrency/token behind them? Metamask, Opensea, Ledger, Oncyber..
Those are all crypto products. This conversation began with a poster stating that web3 and crypto are separate things, implying that web3 is something that could exist without crypto. If the only web3 applications are ways to buy/sell/exchange/mint/store/etc crypto assets, then it is not in fact true that it’s an ecosystem that’s separate from crypto stuff.
I've noticed the hype shifting from crypto to AI, but at least AI is actually going to be somewhat revolutionary and (in my opinion) deserving of the hype. Hopefully it gets mostly used in good ways, rather than as new ways to scam.
Oh that train's already left the station. Plenty of us understand the cons far outweigh the perceived benefits, and it's already bad NOW. It's only going to get much, much worse.
Lets not keep doing the dangerous boring labourous jobs ourselves

And i would love for researchers to not have to code

It seems too early to call it definitely good or definitely bad. Feels like it should eventually be one or the other, though.
It already is revolutionary and maybe we overlook how it is helping us all daily, work faster, spend more quality time, make things easy.

I’ll give just one very small example: I have this huge photo library on my phone and sometimes I need to find a particular photo or receipt from a specific business that I clicked 3-4 years ago. Doing that manually means spending at least 10 mins to 30 mins if I don’t remember the exact month or year I clicked it in. And I used to mostly defer finding the photo as much as I could. Or do it when I was totally bored and nothing to do.

Cue AI: I type the business name or photo description in the search bar and it displays the photo right there. 3 seconds.

Another could be about the Camera app using CV to read live text or numbers. I guess CV and LLMs are specifically going to explode this year as they already have a strong base and proven use case.

Yeah, definitely. I think a fascinating aspect of it is that each milestone seems to dwarf the previous ones, though.

Roughly 5 years ago it seemed amazing that you could search through Google Photos for "dog" and find all your dog pictures. That seems like such a minor milestone now, when you compare it to the way you can today generate amazing text & visual content matching a specific dog that you describe with a single sentence.

It's really annoying but I think the hype is deserved this time. If you think the discourse on AI is saturated now I'd just wait. Wouldn't be surprised if it's 10x current levels in a next couple years.
Here's a hilariously over-the-top AI job posting that one of those grifters (Luc Du Pont of Phoenix Core Entertainment) recently sent to me.

Anybody want to develop work in "hackathon" format to train AI to play PONG, in exchange for promises of equity and a cut of profits instead of cash for your time?

This Big Idea Guy assured me: "Biggest thing is i solved the hard ai/cognitive problem. Hence our secrecy".

Color me impressed! Who wouldn't want to work passionately for promises of peanuts in exchange for a piece of that pie?

And not only has he trademarked "Synthetic Cognitive Identities (TM)" but also he's applied to trademark "ARTIFICIAL PERSONALITY".

https://uspto.report/company/Luke-Du-Pont-S-Phoenix-Core-Ent...

All that groundbreaking top secret trademarked AI technology solving "the hard ai/cognitive problem" just to play PONG. But can it pass butter?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X7HmltUWXgs

Also his now-shut-down Twitter account and his own words when I confronted him about it prove that he is a flaming homophobic transphobic bigot who retweets White Supremacist propoganda, so you better not apply if you're remotely "woke," or aren't qualified and willing to singlehandedly develop a cutting edge MVP on Unity and Unreal Engine at the same time.

Pick a lane, dude.

Oh and you'd also better know how to use Bayes' Theorem to cover your Posterior = Likelihood × Prior ÷ Evidence. He though he'd just throw that qualifying requirement in to filter out the charlatans.

JOB DESCRIPTION

Summary of the Position:

The Potential Engineer will develop work in “hackathon” format collaborating with a cross-disciplinary team to build amazing new technology and tools in the newly designed Artificial Intelligence space of Synthetic Cognitive Identities (TM). This space is specifically a MVP for a SCI to play Pong against a player under the rules of the leadership design. Nuget package and dll come in play in targeting unity and unreal as release platforms for ease of usability.

Main Responsibilities:

Be responsible for your feature's network, memory, GPU and CPU usage

Work on fixing issues in your feature's work.

Make necessary updates to improve stability / performance of the SCI engine

Implement Unity Engine plugins

Work closely with Sr. Developers on project implementation

QUALIFICATIONS

Experience & Qualifications Required:

Passion for software development – we expect you to like to write and maintain code

Experience with the latest Unity Engine release

Experience with Unity profiling tools

Experience with Python

Experience with LISP

Experience with C #

Experience with Unreal Engine Blueprints

Experience with the latest Unreal Engine release

Experience with Unreal profiling tools

Experience with Unreal plugin implementation

Experience with C++

Cross-platform libraries

Experience with communication protocols (HTTP / Web Sockets)

Familiarity with build processes, compiler tool-chains

Experience writing multi-threaded code and reasoning about dependency graphs

Experience with Git

Optimization skills for both code and assets

Statistical and data analytics

Bayes' theorem

Debugging skills

Be ready to invest the effort to become an even better developer

LDAP/Active Directory

High performance computing

Network and software security

Cloud and virtualization technologies

Edge computing

We will appreciate:

Interest in the latest programming trends such as functional and reactive programming

High availability - hardware and software clustering

Tensor flow/Tensor board

AWS application load balancer and elastic load balancing (ec2 compute)

> ARTIFICIAL PERSONALITY

Are they getting this from somewhere? I had a guy show up in my office one day claiming to have invented something even better than machine learning, "machine personality". Similarly claimed to need total secrecy.

Robots and computers with Genuine People Personalities, straight from the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation.
That's hilarious. Guy expects a 140IQ guy that's passionate and naive and will work for pennies so this Du Pont guy can inflate his ego. Crazy.

He'll end up with two college interns that he'll haggle with for the internship certificates / recommendations. That's what usually ends up happening.

Yeah, I've noticed a lot of "AI artists" suddenly pop up out of nowhere.

As far as I can see, they're just typing a prompt into Stable Diffusion or DALL-E and picking a nice image.

It's lazy, talentless, and demeans the actual artists whose work was stolen to train these models.

And not to mention, fun!
How dare something be fun. Everything must be dour serious business at all times.
We all stand on the shoulders of giants. I imagine the first person to carve a stick figure into a rock impressed some folks. Soon enough, the entire village experimented with carving figures into rocks. The smart ones mimicked the techniques of the good ones, and made it better. Soon, the village was flooded with various artworks of stick figures, some more intricate than others. Some had wobly lines, some lines as straight as a ruler.

Eventually the expectations changed. No longer was the village impressed with stick figures. A distinction had to be made between the average stick figure carvers and the good ones. They called them "artists".

Eventually someone figured out how to add color. The cycle repeats and expectations changed, the average distinguished from the talented. No longer was drawing a stick figure without color considered art. To be an artist, you had to use color.

Then someone showed up with a brush, then Photoshop, then Stable Diffusion. In the year 2023, expectations changed, yet again. And the average were separated from the talented, and the best prompt writers were considered artists.

In the year 2040...

Nobody is carving stick figures into rocks here. They're pressing a button on a machine that someone else built that carves stick figures into a rock for them. Saying "best prompt writer" is like saying "best button presser", there's nothing impressive about it.
Yet, only 0.01% of these button pressers are in a different league from all the other button pressers. Everyone can use a paintbrush, but that isn't enough to be an artist.
It’s another form of art that is more accessible. It requires less work and perhaps less skills to get a descent result but you have more skilled people.

I find this event similar than the photography. Oil painters did less portraits but you still have oil painters today. And many people did art using photography.

I don't see it in this way. People are genuinely excited about ChatGPT and are finding ways to build apps around it. I don't see what's bad about this. For influencers, ChatGPT/AI is a great topic because the field is moving fast, there's lots of new development to cover and people are interested.

Crypto grifting was selling the dream to get rich. There was nothing in it to begin with. I think 'grifting' means dishonesty - selling snake oil. I don't think applies to AI, even if it's just a temporary hype cycle. I should mention that Bitcoin is obviously a real thing; "crypto" is the thousands of useless coins which claim to be the next Bitcoin.

They're just journalists playing with speculation. Half a century ago, it was about nukes, rockets, quantum stuff, robots, and AI. Nobody is really an expert in ChatGPT specifically, so it's a low hanging fruit.
didn't the OP state that someone was going to use ML so people could talk to their pets? That's grift because there is fundamentally zero science to make that happen so they would just be lying to all their customers.
Ironically I looked very hard at a couple of legitimate projects in this space (before ChatGTP).

In particular https://www.earthspecies.org/ is a pretty interesting project.

> People are genuinely excited about ChatGPT

Are you kidding me? The movement of people like me who are deeply skeptical about the benefits of generative AI and place them in similar categories of "potentially hazardous to society" inventions like drugs, weapons, etc. is alive and well. We're genuinely fearful that there are folks out there who apparently aren't aware of the severe legal and cultural minefields that these sort of unregulated tools present. I haven't the slightest doubt that, now that we're seeing the collapse of "web3" nonsense/blockchain apps/cryptocurrencies/etc., there's a wealth of grifters looking for their next score and "AI" is the obvious successor.

have you spent a lot of time with chatgpt personally?

for me it feels more inspiring and uplifting about the future of humanity than any technology I've experienced.

Some people feel negative feelings about EVERYTHING. You should have seen the threads here on Github Copilot, or VR, or going to Mars, or ...
could you tell what use case you have in your mind?

To me it looks like something very impressive, but not good enough to rely on it for any serious work..

I think he's more impressed by the trajectory than the current state of affairs.
> I don't see it in this way. People are genuinely excited about ChatGPT and are finding ways to build apps around it.

A year or two ago, these exact same "people" were "genuinely excited" about blockchain and were finding ways to "build apps" around it despite having no idea what a blockchain even was. There is literally no difference.

Blender users that have no programming knowledge try to use ChatGPT to generate Blender scripts to automate stuff for them. I find that a bit concerning. Blender scripts are non-sandboxed Python. While unlikely it could generate a script that deletes all their files. Or runs ransomware. Can there be attacks against ChatGPT that will teach it to include a line that runs ransomware in any script it generates? Fill StackOverflow with ransomware code snippets? Come to think of it, that could just be an attack on StackOverflow copy-pasters.
[flagged]
We can feed prompts into chatGPT ourselves if that's what we want to read.
This is where you insist on getting paid up front, underpromise, and raise your rates until the interest dies to a manageable level.
If they are actually going to pay for your time, why just don't take the job? Riding the latest trends is very normal for media personalities or entrepreneurs, if trends change so do they. If they fail to do that, they will perish.

Obviously, don't do the unethical stuff but if they were somewhat lucky in the crypto boom it would be nice to have that money redirected to ML.

I don't know if its possible to make people talk to their friends using GPT models but sounds like something that people can actually pay for.

If they don't have the dataset, building one or acquiring one can be added to the todo list.

> If they are actually going to pay for your time, why just don't take the job?

You probably never received such am offer. It's always in the form of "I bring the idea, you do all the work and, instead of money, you'll receive a ${rand(5,20)}% share of the resulting company!". And if you offer to do the work for money instead, you'll never hear back.

People serious enough to put money behind their ideas won't randomly ping Reddit mods with them.

I wouldn't dismiss everyone as grifters though. Every now and then it's not the guy with the idea who just needs someone to implement it, but it's actually someone who got lucky in something previously and has resources.

That's why I say do it if they are actually going to pay for your time. I don't know if anyone ever falls to the guy with idea but no resources and no expertise to do it themselves anyway?

Maybe but the style of that definitely felt more like someone getting ready to low-ball. It brought back dotcom-era memories of the guys who wanted to clone some big web site - they always thought it would be “fairly easy”, too.
Same, it brought back dotcom-era(post crash, actually) memories but memories are about me making good money as a high school student. The trick is to ask for downpayment and don't do it for promises(unless it's trivial and the person asking is really nice).
I was fortunate enough to avoid that thanks to knowing a few freelance designers and some Usenet communities where people explained why you never work for exposure and always get a down payment.
I'm not dismissing everyone, but those people the post referred to are all in this category.

People with money to put behind an idea will either open with "I'm looking to hire an ML engineer with experience for a startup idea" (keyword being "hire") or maybe "I'm planning to found a startup and am looking for a technical lead/cofounder". That is, in the unlikely case that they'll hire by pinging Reddit mods instead of going to a known job site.

There is maybe a minuscule chance that there's indeed someone in there who had a windfall, is willing to invest money and has a good idea but no clue on how to hire people, but this is a bit like responding to every spam email in the hopes that you indeed have a deceased Nigerian relative, which inherited you millions but was unable to afford a lawyer that actually speaks English.

I wonder if we can turn this around and somehow scam these people of their crypto?

"This is an excellent idea and I would be happy to get started on it. Please send me X BTC to this address as a downpayment."

In the 1700s, the new world was the hot new thing leading to the south seas bubble. In the 1850s people bandwagoned rail and steam power, leading to the rail bubble. In the 1920s it was radio technology. In 1970s it was polaroid. In 2000 it was dotcom.

Every bubble busts, but the end result has left us with rail lines, the United States, radio, television, digital cameras, and fiber optic lines.

The overall direction is upwards. EVs will probably be the long term outcome of the last bubble. AI still has a long way to go.

Crypto will probably go the way of the less useful bubbles (beanie babies and tulips)

Thank you for sharing. I hadn't heard of the South Seas Bubble. Now I'm wondering if such a bubble—formed around a single company—could come about today.
Enron, FTX
GameStop. Tesla. Tech stocks generally until last year.

Doesn’t need to be fraudulent to be a bubble.

> Crypto will probably go the way of the less useful bubbles (beanie babies and tulips)

People say that and yet it's been like what, 14 years? How long can a tulip market really last?

They don't understand the potential, they just repeat same info for years.
I saw a video the other day claiming to be the start of a "ChatGPT expert in 13 days." A what?
Wow, 13 days? Usually it’s 13 minutes.
You can’t fit enough ads in 13 minutes to justify the education expenses.
It takes more than 13 minutes to add the channel plugs and the "like share subscribe" etc crapola.
Oh, no. Are these some of the same people who pivoted from binary options in Tel Aviv to crypto out of Bulgaria and Cyprus to this? If it involves a large outgoing call center sales operation, there's a good chance it is. That seems to be the core skill set of that crowd.
I'm hope the trend will go nuclear one day :))
I hate to say I called it but I literally called it years ago, "AI" will be the new grift in due time.
The immediate bummer about ChatGPT and its ilk for me isn’t scammers (though I’m sure it’s an issue that will get worse), but… insufferably dull people.

I figured that “old people getting on Facebook” must have been the final Eternal September, but apparently nope. Now, people that otherwise would never post (on social media, forums, etc) due to not having any knowledge or opinion on a given topic have the option of copying and pasting text back and forth to mindlessly farm engagement.

The era of the Ultimate Reply Guy is upon us, and it sucks. In the same way that rickrolling was a substitute for having a sense of humor, “Here’s what the robot says” is a substitute for insight or personality.

> Now, people that otherwise would never post (on social media, forums, etc) due to not having any knowledge or opinion on a given topic have the option of copying and pasting text back and forth to mindlessly farm engagement.

This is such an odd, hostile way to react to people posting things on the internet that I'm genuinely curious what part of this you have an actual problem with?

Framed another way, what you're describing here is that using ChatGPT is interesting enough to trigger engagement from social media users who are otherwise mostly inactive. If that is indeed the case, imo that is a pretty strong indicator of appeal to a wide audience.

> Framed another way, what you're describing here is that using ChatGPT is interesting enough to trigger engagement from social media users who are otherwise mostly inactive. If that is indeed the case, imo that is a pretty strong indicator of appeal to a wide audience.

I understood the comment to mean the posters are not posting about ChatGPT, but using ChatGPT to generate vapid (?, or inauthentic?) posts to farm engagement where there would otherwise be silence.

(comment deleted)
I think you may be right! Thanks for the clarity.
What is the difference in value between a person that pastes questions into ChatGPT and then pastes the results to your feed versus a browser extension that does the same exact thing for you?

It’s not really a fun party trick if literally everyone can do it. If I want to know what GPT has to say about something, I can find out myself in seconds.

Humans have always been input machines that produce outputs.
Maybe I'm in the minority at this point, but I like talking to people, not robots.

If you think there's no difference, why not just cease all contact with other humans and spend the rest of your life talking to ChatGPT since you love it so much?

In online discussions many people do not really make arguments from knowledge. People will arbitrarily choose a "side" on some topic, and then formulate arguments by searching for "proof for why my random opinion is totally right" or "proof for what this guy is saying is totally wrong."

There's no exchange of ideas or views, the entire point of discussion, because the person you're discussing the issue with doesn't know what they're talking about. So it's a complete waste of time. Yet this can be hard to see at first because, thanks to the internet, even a blind man could describe the art of the Sistine Chapel with absolute clarity.

ChatGPT will make this orders of magnitude worse. Because now that "proof my biases are right" will become more eloquent and more dynamic. And the lack of knowledge even more extreme, because now you need not even be able to paraphrase what you're reading. Just dump it straight from the bot.

And then there will be active abuse. Now spammers and governments alike can have a million bots spamming either for viagra or war. And it will be done using dynamically generated text that can be tied into any arbitrary topic. And populating those bots with "real" histories will be trivial by having them formulate random, but relevant, comments in topics outside their "real" purpose.

It feels hyperbolic, yet it seems very possible that text-generation software may kill off meaningful discourse on the internet, at least outside of small vetted communities. And while internet dialogue has always been a bit of a bubble, the inevitable "dynamic propaganda" now means you'll never be able to even get a remote sense of the views of the public at large.

First, this comment seems like a hater perspective. "I hate things people like."

Second, this was already going on for much longer than you think. If you read reddit now, or if you were 5 years ago, most of the posts are reposts from bots, and most of the top comments are reposts from top comments of the exact same posts. People, or bots, I don't know, literally find the previous posts of the exact same thing and copy/paste the top comments from there to have a higher chance at getting karma, and it's working.

What is a hater?

Is it somebody that pops up to tell people that their opinions are wrong and insult them?

Didn't that already happen well before chatGPT? With the rise of "personal branding". Every medium seems to be filled with people churning out empty meaningless content at an impossible rate just to get a few likes/follows.

People with interesting ideas walked away because they could not create quality content at that rate. Or they had these "experts" shout them down. ChatGPT just seems to be more of the same.

> The era of the Ultimate Reply Guy is upon us, and it sucks. In the same way that rickrolling was a substitute for having a sense of humor, “Here’s what the robot says” is a substitute for insight or personality.

As opposed to the usual high-quality, high-effort content on social media of one of the following: pictures of pets, pictures of kids, pictures of food, pictures of an insightful quote you copied somewhere, videos of you lip synching to something, videos of you dancing the exact same dance that a million other people have done on other videos, pictures of you in front of a landmark or at a beach or pool to show how "wordly and cultured" you are, your quiz results for some bullshit made-up quiz, some five-second hot take commentary on some current event topic (likely just parroting another hot take you read five minutes earlier), how much you loved or hated the newest blockbuster film or tv show, etc etc.

I'd rather see what a good A.I. has to say about various subjects compared to most of those, personally.