I propose a navigation plugin for the AI slop era.
-
@malte turns out "clickup" already has a firefox extention called ClickUp AI Filter
@diffdude That seems like the opposite of what I'm proposing.
-
@malte i like this idea but i worry about people seeing an em-dash or
a college-level vocabulary will automatically assume it's slop@crumbleneedy If a page gets scored by 100 people and one person is fixated on em-dashes, it shouldn't change much. Do you have any trust in collective intelligence?
-
@malte I hear you, but I'm still not sold on this for the same reasons.
You're asking people to prove their work isn't AI, but how do you even do that? And then you need moderators to decide what counts as proof? That's just a mess waiting to happen.
Maybe cryptographic signatures could work, where people sign their own stuff. Though I don't know enough about that to say if it's practical.
The "trust established sources" thing I really don't like—that just puts power back in the hands of a few big platforms and publications. Goes against the whole decentralized web thing, right?
I keep coming back to this: we probably just need to get better at reading critically ourselves. Actually learning to spot bullshit, AI or not. Tools could maybe help with that? Not telling you what's real or fake, but like... teaching you what questions to ask, what to look for. I don't know exactly what that looks like.
Honestly the whole thing is frustrating because there probably isn't a clean solution. We want the button that fixes everything but that's not how this works. Some things you just have to figure out the hard way.
@giuda_ballerino Looking forward to see how you will make something that will help us read more critically and learn to spot bullshit better.
-
@crumbleneedy If a page gets scored by 100 people and one person is fixated on em-dashes, it shouldn't change much. Do you have any trust in collective intelligence?
@malte you aren't going to know how many fixated on what. i'm relatively confident given the wikipedia example, but it's still a risk. it would need some kind of appeals process.
-
@malte you aren't going to know how many fixated on what. i'm relatively confident given the wikipedia example, but it's still a risk. it would need some kind of appeals process.
@crumbleneedy I don't disagree with you that there are risks. At the moment, my search experience is rapidly deteriorating. I want to start a conversation what we can do about it. I like your idea about an appeals process. How do you think it should look like?
-
@crumbleneedy I don't disagree with you that there are risks. At the moment, my search experience is rapidly deteriorating. I want to start a conversation what we can do about it. I like your idea about an appeals process. How do you think it should look like?
@malte not sure - but it goes to the question of how one proves one's work is one's own and not slop. this problem seems to be happening more and more in education (which is what i had in mind when i brought it up) - i reckon there would be discussions in that area that suggest some answers. eg students being wrongly accused of using AI. i'd love to think i could always tell the difference but it's probably going to get harder over time - unless it all falls in a heap and the data centers all die.
-
@malte not sure - but it goes to the question of how one proves one's work is one's own and not slop. this problem seems to be happening more and more in education (which is what i had in mind when i brought it up) - i reckon there would be discussions in that area that suggest some answers. eg students being wrongly accused of using AI. i'd love to think i could always tell the difference but it's probably going to get harder over time - unless it all falls in a heap and the data centers all die.
@crumbleneedy I could easily name a few hundred accounts on here that I feel confident are writing their own toots and don't generate them with LLM. I could easily do the same with a few hundred sites too. For example, I can judge likely LLM-generated gardening content from a mile away, because gardening is my field. I think others could benefit from that. We don't need absolute certainty to help us navigate the web better.
-
@crumbleneedy I could easily name a few hundred accounts on here that I feel confident are writing their own toots and don't generate them with LLM. I could easily do the same with a few hundred sites too. For example, I can judge likely LLM-generated gardening content from a mile away, because gardening is my field. I think others could benefit from that. We don't need absolute certainty to help us navigate the web better.
@malte what you or i feel confident about really doesn't matter when you crowdsource making the call, and false accusations are already happening. just pointing to something that seems to need especial care and attention in any useful approach to the kind of functionality you're talking about.
-
@malte what you or i feel confident about really doesn't matter when you crowdsource making the call, and false accusations are already happening. just pointing to something that seems to need especial care and attention in any useful approach to the kind of functionality you're talking about.
@crumbleneedy Yes, special care and attention will be needed. How do imagine fighting AI slop polluting the internet?
-
I propose a navigation plugin for the AI slop era. Tool should help us find LLM-free sites based on Web of Trust crowd verification. Browsing the web, you label a site as either free from or polluted by LLM slop. One button in your browser toolbar with a keyboard shortcut. An icon indicates how the community assesses the page. Let's rid ourselves of the constant suspicion that all we read is AI-generated bullshit and put the collective intelligence to work.
Could someone build this?
@malte
Could easily be abused by those with grudges against sites though? I can imagine if certain factions get hold of it, sites of e.g. political groups could be downrated by the other side etc.... -
@malte
Could easily be abused by those with grudges against sites though? I can imagine if certain factions get hold of it, sites of e.g. political groups could be downrated by the other side etc....@ddlyh Yes, I'm sure we can imagine all kinds of risks. The "building" part in my question has to do about coming up with ideas for how to meet those challenges. What is your version? If you're not building anything, you're implying I do all the work. My comments are filled with leading questions based on worries like this.
