Well, we aren't talked about AI going rogue... but putting that aside... Yes, it's what people do with AI. I see AI used by people to tackle misinformation as at worst an equalizer, meaning in the AI agent's war, they will neutralize each other, doing it almost instantly. There wouldn't be a gap of misinformation out there and it takes hours to days to respond. It would be more instant, within seconds. That's a win to me. As much flack as people (especially the right) have on AI Chatbots, if you use today's "mainstream" AI chatbots from Google, OpenAI, Microsoft, Antropic, and so on, you see that they're trying their best to be neutral, non-partisan, non-dangerous, and factual (of course, there are problems with hallucination and bias). Not anywhere close to perfect but it's actually very good and I would say, more trustworthy than almost all politicians and most "news" sites. People using these services will not be radicalized like they could be with FB, Twitter, and the like. Of course, these are still the early days. Chatbots to radicalize are coming. (all of this is better suited for the AI misinformation thread)
You’re far more optimistic about this than I am. Even the most straightforward honest AI fact checker still relies upon reputation. That reputation will largely be shaped by who created and who uses that AI. What we’ve seen with fact checkers like Snopes and fact checkers out out by mainstream media is that they are now being attacked not on substance but on claims that they have things like a liberal bias. as such they are dismissed or ignored by many of those reposting misinformation. As AI produces better and more convincing misinformation those already prone to confirmation bias will believe that and recirculate that far more broadly than they will AI fact checkers.
I've been told that many times, and sometimes it's just a nice way of saying I'm being unrealistic, which isn't wrong. You can't defeat someone's inherent biases or beliefs - only they can defeat those themselves. There's nothing you can do other than provide them with the information. It's up to them whether they see it and accept it or not. But at least with the information more available and available early on instead of hours or days later, they have the choice to look at it and consider it, whereas today, it's mostly drowned out by the vast constant streams of misinformation out there... So, let the AI information war begin... I was reluctant, but I support a limited "strike down" on misinformation because of the asymmetry I mentioned - how easy it is to create and spread misinformation versus how hard it is to tackle it. I was hesitant because gov could abuse that power to suppress free speech, and I believe the best, most factual ideas will eventually rise to the top and win out. But I realized that's no longer possible in an environment with such asymmetry, which isn't new but has become much more impactful with social media. Now, I optimistically see AI agents as an equalizer that could level the playing field. There will be good and bad AI agents when it comes to misinformation, but I trust the best, most factual-based ideas will propagate to the top. All I ask for is a level playing field, and I'll accept the outcome.
And I hope you're right. I don't see much here or elsewhere in social media that says that many of those who believe social media will accept AI fact checkers anymore than human fact checkers. What I do see is people are far more swayed by material that confirms their own biases and as AI gets stronger that will material will be even more convincing. Also as we see with the case of the Baltimore principal people are far more moved by outrage than they are debunking. People are far more quickly going to jump on and recirculate material that drives outrage rather than things that calmy debunk.
D&D isn't exactly representative of the general population. We have some crazy devotees here. You are probably right though that AI agents will face similar challenges - while they are machines and not human, they can be biased and may have hidden motives as they are directed by humans after all. And the old question of how to check the checkers? Even with that, the speed of response, or reducing the asymmetry of the misinformation problem or even collapsing it completely will make a big difference. People are easily outraged, it has always been. The Baltimore case is a good example among many many examples of the asymmetry problem and the harm it causes. If the "debunking" (or better-informing) was more instant, there is a much better chance to cool that outrage or rid of it. AI agents don't need to just "debunk" (I would say simply debunking is not so effective). They can converse at a general, a subgroup, and an individual level. Can do so 24/7 without limit. And they can do so in a way that is much more effective than a human can. They can truly listen, focus on points, arguments, and not get tied up in emotion, personal attacks and the like. In a recent MIT study, an AI chatbot was surprisingly successful at moderating strong conspiracy theorists. It reduced their beliefs by 20% with the reduction persisting for at least 2 months, suggesting a lasting effect. The chatbot followed a fact-based method to question conspiracy theories. That's pretty good news. OTOH, the bad news is that it means it might be persuasive and convincing in a negative way too. https://www.newscientist.com/articl...nspiracy-theorists-their-view-might-be-wrong/ https://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/xcwdn?ref=warpnews.org
I thought the d&d wanted to chop the nuts of any kids who like the color pink or painted a rainbow in class
To be anti-woke is to bully, dehumanize and punch down on the vulnerable and minorities. To be anti-woke is to yield to one’s worst xenophobic and racist impulses when it comes to dealing with anyone that is different. To be anti-woke is to defend and even celebrate things like the Confederacy, McCarthyism, the Punisher and Mickey Rooney’s portrayal of the Asian landlord in Breakfast at Tiffany’s. And more than anything (at least these days), being anti-woke means hating certain demographics so totally that one is willing to support outrageously corrupt politicians so long as said politicians vocally share that same hatred. Not only does being anti-woke nauseate my moral core, it also sounds completely exhausting. If I spent so much of my life looking for anecdotes to justify my hatred of people who were different than me, I wouldn’t have time to enjoy any of the things that make life worth living.
89% of the content is like 4 posters comprised of 4 of your alternate accounts. Exactly. Thank goodness society isn't just a bunch of rejects who pretend they are corporate executives on NBA team fan message boards who spam Tweets about Muslims and trans people in a Houston Rockets message board.
Hope this post fulfilled its intended purpose - you feeling better about yourself by making up all kinds of stuff nobody ever talked about. Confederacy? McCarthyism? Mickey Rooney? What the hell are you even talking about. If anything, the wokists are the ones who cancel others and are therefore closer to McCarthyists than anyone.
I’ll respond to the rest of your post when I have more time but yes the D&D isn’t represent the population as a whole as this is a very self-selected group but it is a furtherance of many views out in the population of the whole. Most of the content here isn’t created here or original ideas. Most of the content is verbatim repost of material generated from other sources and attitudes here are found in many other parts of our society.
I agree that most content is now just "pass-on" content from elsewhere and isn't of original thought from members here. Moreover, most of it is of the "outrage" and partisan type. These are usually from Twitter. This type of "hot-take" and outrage content isn't representative of the population. It's representative of the somewhat nutty devotees of politics, especially those who already have a predetermined PoV and are simply repeating and spamming content aligned with their PoV here. This thread is a good example, which discuss the outsized outrage about transgender issues relative to the population at large.
To better explain D&D doesn’t represent the population as say a sampling poll would but it is representative that the debates and content here are part of the wider population. D&D other than that it’s made up of Houston Sports fans isn’t unusual from wha passes for political debate in this society.
There’s Lin fans here The d&d has people who don’t understand basketball And politics And the marvel legend Blade @Salvy
