> More interesting: in the future with gpt5 and image generation tech, how will we know if anything is real ever again online? Actual question

Another question... Say we discover a new planet in 2030. Countless low quality, click/ads driven websites are going to report about it using gpt-4 text and dall-e 4 pictures.

Now how do we train gpt-5 and dall-e 5 to know about that new planet, yet somehow sort between what's "real" about that planet and what's poorly generated by inferior AIs (by that I mean inferior to the new version of the AI we're trying to train)?

Do we now need an AI to first determine what's real and what's not to know how to correctly train the new AI without using polluted data?

Mind blown.

It's ML memes, which - unlike human memes - are not naturally rate-limited.

without having read it yet, I'm going to say I'm already prone to thinking certain kinds of blog writing are gpt3 and it's insidious and enormously destructive of what's left of the human ecosystem on the web that we have to seriously ask that question.

What may happen is that everyone begins to realize that the shit they read every day is pointless garbage that doesn't actually pertain to them at all.

Case in point: I crossed the border into Canada this week and woke up one morning with some extra time for google news doom scrolling before I got out of bed. It took about halfway through the scroll to realize I was logged out and that all the crime and politics headlines I was reading were about things that had happened in Canada. Which meant nothing to me and which I would never have heard about otherwise. (And yet there was a whole different galaxy of stories that had clearly been going on for some time). This was like in the 80s when you'd intentionally turn on the local TV news in your hotel room to see local broadcasters wherever you were visiting, except it wasn't intentional. And yet I realized my brain could not give two fucks before coffee if these stories had been generated by an AI or they were irrelevantly Canadian, I just needed to doom scroll some shit before breakfast. But after that I stopped reading the news and just enjoyed being in a country where nothing much happens. So my prediction is that the moment people realize they're reading AI-generated news, they'll just tune out completely. It would be like suddenly realizing you've been listening to CBC.

Very simple - you won't be able to tell the difference. Philip.K. Dick painted this future so well in his "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?" novel.

Also a recurring theme in Ubik!

And Second Variety

And Total Recall (We Can Remember It for You Wholesale)

And The Father Thing

Shrdlu agrees.

The article was previously published in 2017, before gpt 3 existed:

https://theoutline.com/post/995/targeted-individuals-paranoi...

Was it? How do you know that there's not a goverment conspiracy to backdate this article so as to pretend it wasn't written by GPT-3?

What, a Wayback Machine copy from ~ the original byline[1]? Brewster Kahle is in on it too? This goes higher up than I thought[2]...

[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20170318075738/https://theoutlin... [2] https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/b7bhdu/a_jfk_conspir...

How do you know they didn’t sent someone back in time to post the article? How do you know it’s not one of GPT-3 descendants? ;-)

That would at least explain all the (overtly) AI generated imagery around the article.

It would also be pretty hilarious to have an article debunking claims about secret technology being secretly written by an AI.

I guess everything going to be modern politics - tune in to the media source that confirms your existing biases and feel good at the social validation that others think like you do.

Nothing is real at a quantum level.

it doesn't matter. if the content is good, doesn't have glaring logical errors and even some people agree with it, its real enough.

Real enough for what?

for driving clicks. because sadly that's what matters on today's internet.