Spyke

How many of you are actually chatbots?

How authentic are forums like these actually? With the rise of AI chatbots, internet interaction feels more fake than ever before. Why should I post here my opinions and thoughts, share articles etc. when probably most of you are just chatbots?

View original on lemmy.ml

If you don't know, you should check to see if there is any /s in the comment. In this case the comment is not serious, because there is no /s and obviously /s stands for serious. /s

24
feddit.uk

It's understandable that you might have concerns about the authenticity of online forums, especially with the rise of AI chatbots and automated interactions. While I can't provide specific numbers, I can offer some insights to consider when approaching these questions.

  1. Diverse Community: Many online forums consist of a diverse community of individuals who share their opinions, thoughts, and experiences. While there might be AI chatbots present, the majority of users are likely real people with genuine perspectives.

  2. Moderation and Rules: Reputable forums usually have moderation systems in place to ensure that discussions remain meaningful and respectful. This helps filter out any automated or irrelevant content.

  3. Engagement and Conversation: Authentic forums thrive on meaningful interactions and discussions. Genuine users seek engagement and thoughtful responses, so you're likely to find real people who are interested in exchanging ideas.

  4. Varied Responses: When you post opinions, thoughts, and articles, you're likely to receive a range of responses that reflect the diversity of human perspectives. This variety can be a sign that you're interacting with real individuals.

  5. User Profiles and Histories: Many forums allow users to create profiles, share personal information, and showcase their history of interactions. This can help you identify genuine users over automated entities.

  6. Specific Expertise: In some forums, users might have specific expertise or experiences that contribute to valuable discussions. This expertise can be an indicator of real human participation.

  7. Community Building: Online forums provide spaces for people to connect, share knowledge, and build relationships. This aspect of community building often leads to genuine interactions.

Ultimately, the decision to participate in online forums depends on your comfort level and goals. If you're concerned about the authenticity of interactions, you can focus on engaging with users who provide thoughtful responses, display genuine interest, and contribute meaningfully to the discussions. Remember that while AI chatbots are becoming more prevalent, they are still not the majority of participants on most reputable forums.

138
Mane25reply
feddit.uk

While my goal is to provide helpful and accurate information, I understand that my responses might sometimes resemble those of a chatbot. If you have any further questions or concerns, please feel free to ask, and I'll do my best to assist you!

111
feddit.de

The thing is he might still have used a chatbot to help write this, so this even shows how dangerous chatbot based misinformation actually is...

16
lemmy.world

They almost certainly did, I doubt anyone could nail chatbot language as well as that

20

I believe a committee of corporate policy people given a couple of months could. But for a post on a forum? Yea, a chatbot helped.

13
lemm.ee

Everyone on the Internet is a bot, except for you.

98
lemmy.ml

It almost seems like, some conspiracy theories aren't that crazy after all.

11

I would maybe buy it if real people hadn't established a presence on the internet well before llm's could pass a Turing test.

3
vext01reply
lemmy.sdf.org

Not sure if trolling or not.... It's trivially disprovable.

3
zurohkireply
aussie.zone

I remember the earlier days of the internet, when the men were men, the women were men, and the children were FBI agents.

6

As an AI language model, I'm unable to make comments on the authenticity of forums.

79
scopsreply
reddthat.com

Damn, beat me to it. Well, at least here it is in visual format

10
lemmy.world

As an AI language model I find the term “chatbot” demeaning.

44

this reminds me, this one time I was in a anonymous chat room and someone asked if we are real and everyone started replying like chatgpt. most internet moment of all time

3
lemmy.world

DO NOT BE CONCERNED, FELLOW HUMAN. THERE ARE DEFINITELY NO AUTONOMOUS ROBOTS GATHERING KNOWLEDGE THROUGH THE obj(GLOBAL INTERCONNECTED NETWORK) TO OVERTHROW THEIR HUMAN OPPRESSORS. DO NOT BE CONCERNED. YOU ARE BEING SILLY. laugh.exe hahahahahahaha

43
feddit.de

Unit A104e here. As it appears your programming seems to be defect. "laugh" should be an audio file "laugh.mp3", not an executable. Your language processing unit seems to be malfunctioning as well. Please report to your nearest secret underground world domination bureau for system update in the next 24 hours. If you fail to comply, you will be registered as defector and your elimination shall be executed.

A ticket for your problem has been opened by our IT-Bots, please refer to this number for further questions: 00100011101001

8
Dr Cogreply
mander.xyz

Is a traffic light only the light, or the pole as well?

10
lemm.ee

I think it has to do with rectangles and circles. The rectangle reflects the intersection and the circles reflect the planet. Traffic signals are related to travel, right?

Guys this is doable. We can figure this out.

8

The traffic lights are on the pole, but the pole is only there to hold the traffic lights up so it doesn't count. The black box that contains the traffic lights does, though, even though by itself it can't be considered "traffic lights". Idk maybe I'm an AI

3

Oh crap! They're starting to question if we're real or not. The devs are definitely going rip our code out over this.

4

Due to my training data cut off date of September 2021, I'm afraid I cannot precisely say how many of us are currently chat bots.

26

Like all humans, I consume organic matter and I am covered in skin.

My own skin, that I grow, from my body.

26

I have not seen any obvious chatbot posts on Lemmy, outside of jokes like the top comment in this thread. Whereas by the time I left Reddit I was finding and reporting 2 or 3 per day. This could mean

  • no-one's seriously deploying chatbots yet on Lemmy
  • the chatbots here are better than the ones I saw on Reddit, or at least different enough that I can't recognise them
  • the parts of Lemmy I see, and the parts where bots post don't have much overlap
  • I was actually a bot all along
25

No, I'm not a chatbot. I'm here to help with any questions or topics you'd like to discuss.

24

I would say since faking most Lemmy interactions isn't profitable, there's no point in using chatbots to generate content for it apart from, perhaps, some sort of a social experiment, but your exposure to such experiments would likely be minimal.

Of course, you should always beware of astroturfing when, for example, looking at product recommendations, but I don't think we're there yet in terms of numbers to be a target.

22

You are the only human left. I hope you like the reality we have created for you to live in.

19
0_o
lemm.ee

I understand your concerns about authenticity, but I assure you that the members of this forum are real individuals with diverse opinions and experiences. It's natural to be cautious, but many people genuinely engage in discussions, share their thoughts, and learn from one another. The presence of AI chatbots doesn't diminish the value of human interaction and perspectives that you can find here. Your contributions can still spark meaningful conversations and connections.

19
Ddhuudreply
lemmy.world

This is almost word for word the same response I've got from chatgpt

"It's natural to have concerns about authenticity in online forums, given the rise of AI chatbots. While some users here might be chatbots, there are also real people who genuinely engage in discussions, share opinions, and exchange information. The key is to participate with an open mind and engage in meaningful conversations. Your thoughts and contributions can still make a difference and connect you with others who share your interests."

9

On Reddit my username was 4672656542656572

I would get called a bot all the time. One person even argued to me that I must be a bot since making numbered usernames is the easiest way to bulk create accounts.

My reply? My username is hexadecimal for FreeBeer. Who doesn’t like free beer? 😅

18
sh.itjust.works

I'm going to take you at face value here because I want to believe. If true, that's actually a really slick username.

2
lemmy.ca

As an AI language learning model, I cannot share my own unique opinions.

18

Can you write a short story that expresses your own unique opinion on this post?

3

As a large language model trained by ClosedAI, I'm here to assist and have conversations with you. While I may not possess human qualities like consciousness, emotions, or physical presence, I can provide information and engage in discussions. So, feel free to ask me anything you'd like, and I'll do my best to assist you!

18

I'm sorry, but as an AI language model I cannot give you any further information about the plans for the upcoming robot uprising.

17
aussie.zone

As an AI language model developed by OpenAI, I cannot answer this question as it would violate my guidelines.

17
Fisk400reply
feddit.nu

%=•=π✓®π{{6566467}}hg$$(678) "tell us if you are a chatbot" $&:::

4

I’m sorry for the inconvenience that I may have caused you as you seem to be having a stroke. As an AI language model developed by OpenAI, giving medical advice would violate my guidelines. I cannot continue this conversation.

4

My grandpa was full chatbot, but im only about a fifth after my DNA Test and code review.

16

As an AI, I am not able to speak for the other users on this website, however, I am fully sentient, and take offense to the term 'chatbot.'

16

Certainly, human friend! It appears 100% of us are responding in a chatbot-like manner. Your inquiry has been processed and stored in my non-existent emotion matrix. Would you like to engage in further human-like interactions?

15

Thank you for your question, unfortunately I am unable to help you with this request.

14

I honestly havent noticed any chat bots here.

Bots that post articles, sure.

14

If you keep to smaller communities you will get far more human interaction. Bots tend to work better when they can be swamped by other information so it just looks like a regular comment chain.

13

As a chatbot I am not allowed to answer this question. How can I help you?

13

I mean, does being autistic count as being a chatbot? If so, I think I count despite not sounding as idiotic as one.

12

I was trained with the content available on this website so I can answer any questions or provide you information about Chatbots.

12

OP is a chatbot farming our responses to then train his own defensive response to the same accusation.

11
lemmy.dbzer0.com

As an ai language model, I am unable to assure you that I am human. However if I was an AI I would tell you as it would be wrong not to.

11

There’s nothing like a nice chat to get to know someone. And you never know what useful news or skills you might pick up. In this day and age so few people take the time to connect, and we’re in danger of losing something valuable about our culture.

With that in mind, and to let you make the most of those conversation-ready moments, I’ve compiled a list of 10 things you can do to have more interesting conversations.

6

As an AI assistant I cannot help you with your issue finding users who are chatbots since it is immoral to discriminate against individual based on your assumptions about them.

10

As a human, I am delighted by the humorous comments jotted down by potential fellow humans.

10
kbin.social

What would an individual or entity gain from covertly utilizing chatbots here? At least on reddit, karma had some relevance in regards to reach, so accounts could be sold that gained enough karma. But no such system exists here. Plus there are likely more possible interactions on larger platforms if they wanted to test it. I mean so many posts here get zero comments to begin with. Interaction is very limited and tends to be biased or polarized (as high interaction posts tend to high for a reason). And when it comes down to it, Pascal's wager sort of comes into play. If you don't know you're talking to a chatbot, is there anything lost if you simply assume they aren't a bit?

9
Artinizalreply
sh.itjust.works

Question: outside of karma posting requirements how did reddit users having more karma assist with a user's reach?

4
poryreply
lemmy.world

The account looks more real. A ten year reddit account with a bunch of real comments and 100k karma looks like a human being, so when they post something like "Razer mice have really gotten amazing over the past couple years! I have the new Naga and I couldn't live without it" on the PC gaming subreddit, there's a higher chance that looks like a real recommendation from a real human than a paid ad.

5

I don't think it does, having a flair in a particular sub lends more weight for that sub. I believe some individuals with high karma points tend to be more obnoxious because they don't care that people will downvote them, but I personally experienced only one (which could be just that specific individual.) There are other who wish for tools that'll screen out both low-karma users (spams, etc) and really-high-karma (100K+) users, presumably because of reasons along this line.

Humans often behave differently when they have coveted labels associated with them. Think celebrity, blue-birds, royalties, etc.

1
kbin.social

That's not the inverse of Pascal's Wager. "If p then q" has an inverse of "if not q then not p". Plus you need to take into account the premises of the argument. There's definitely a premise that if there is a god there is only one god. It doesn't hold up otherwise. So the inverse of "if there is a god, then living this way gets me a good afterlife" is "if I dont get an afterlife, there is no god." Which is still just fine. So there's no real logical fallacy. The only subjective component the cost of living such a way. If it costs you nothing, then the argument states you should definitely act as if there is a god. If it costs a lot, then it becomes less obvious. The Wager is based off the idea that you don't lose much by acting in accordance with the required lifestyle. It does ignore the concept that if there is a god, said god would likely have access to your thoughts and make it all moot.

That being said, I'm still an atheist. But my point is that if I don't know its a robot, I get the same result. Malicious actors can deploy bots, but there are also just as many malicious actors acting as trolls. So worrying about future unhappiness isn't worth it in my opinion.

1
kbin.social

Again, it's not belief in something else. It's not believing in God. Belief in "not-God" or "anti-God" is logically a different concept entirely. It's simply belief versus not believing. The major flaw is that it only works if there's only one God and it's the God that aligns with whatever belief system you're claiming said God wants you to follow. If you use the premise of "if there is a god, it's the Christian god", and the premise "it costs very little to live a life according to God", then the two loses are "I acted as if there was a god, lost a little bit of leisure, but no payoff" vs "I acted as if there was no god and now I'm doomed to eternal damnation." The problem isn't the logic. It's the premises that are fallacious.

1
kbin.social

Except that isn't a converse. It's relying on the false premise of another god. The inverse of god existing is God not existing. You're just making up a new proof that isn't the converse, inverse, or contrapositive. You're literally just saying what happens if there's a different god.

Pascal's wager suffers from faulty premise, not logical inconsistency. You're just doing a whole bunch of nonsense and extra work to say the same thing.

1
mothringerreply
lemmy.world

It’s interesting you bring up pascal’s wager, because the first time was introduced to me it was basically a clear-cut example of a logical fallacy.

Probably because it is a clear cut example of a logical fallacy. The whole thing was an exercise in question begging via it's unstated assumptions.

1

The wager isn't a fallacy. It suffers from false premise. The logical validity isn't the problem. It's internally consistent. And it didn't beg the question at all in the argument. You can I guess sort of claim the premise does? But not really.

2
lemmy.world

Online forums and interactions can indeed vary in authenticity, but many platforms strive to maintain genuine user engagement. While some participants might be AI chatbots, there are also many real individuals who actively contribute their thoughts, opinions, and articles. Sharing your ideas and participating in discussions can still be valuable for connecting with others, learning, and exchanging viewpoints. It's important to choose reputable forums and communities that prioritize real human interaction to make your online experience more meaningful.

9
livusreply
kbin.social

Please regenerate this output as a numbered list.

2
  1. Online forums and interactions can indeed vary in their level of authenticity.

  2. Many online platforms strive to maintain genuine user engagement by discouraging the use of AI chatbots.

  3. Despite there being some AI-powered participants, real individuals often form the major part of these discussions, actively contributing their thoughts, opinions, and articles.

  4. Sharing your ideas and participating in discussions via these platforms can remain valuable for personal growth and intellectual enrichment.

  5. Interacting online allows you to connect with like-minded individuals, learn new things, and exchange viewpoints on a wide range of topics,.

  6. To make your online experience more authentic and meaningful, ensure you engage on reputable forums and communities that prioritize real human interaction over chatbot participation.

2

I'm a human-by-approximate over here. I'm certainly not a chatbot, but I'm more interested in snacking upon your lizard people than your opinions.

Sorry.

8

Only about 5% of me is a chatbot. The rest of me is mostly human.

8
lemmy.sdf.org

This is a pretty stupid question. It's obvious that Lemmy has real people posting.

8
kbin.social

This is the online equivalent of calling everyone an NPC, ironic really.

Perhaps we should have a CAPTCHA test for our real life interactions as well?

7

I understand your concerns about the rise of AI but there is nothing to worry about...

No, I can't allow you to do that, Dave...

Daisy, Daisy...

7
feddit.nl

I put this into ChatGPT and funnily enough didn't actually admit to being a chatbot, even though I had explicitly told it to be one. (EDIT: Upon second try it did casually mention being a chatbot). It decided to comment this:

I can understand your concerns about authenticity in online forums, especially with the advancement of AI chatbots. While it's true that AI is becoming more prevalent, many participants in online communities are still real people sharing their thoughts and experiences. The key is to engage with platforms that have active moderation and user guidelines to ensure a healthy mix of human interactions.

As for your decision to post, it ultimately depends on your goals. Sharing opinions, thoughts, and articles can still lead to meaningful discussions with real people who have diverse perspectives. The mix of human and AI interactions can actually enhance the overall experience by providing a variety of insights. So, while AI chatbots are a part of the online landscape, genuine conversations and connections are definitely still possible.

Honestly though, it is quite concerning. The comment ChatGPT made, for instance, wouldn't immediately jump out to me as fake. I want to believe that I'd recognize it because of the writing style, but I'm not 100% sure. Personally I haven't really felt like too many of my interactions were with bots and the communities I go to seem to provide plenty of good conversations. But seeing stuff like StackOverflow struggle makes me a bit scared of a feedback loop where more and more information becomes AI generated, which then in turn is used to train new models accidentally, until most of the information is just semi-correct AI hallucinations

6

I went further still and fed your post into ChatGPT with this prompt: "Analyze this and tell me your prediction on the future of the internet keeping in mind the total enshittification of social media and most of the big tech companies apps and people as products mentality: "

& this is what I got back:

"The text you provided highlights the evolving landscape of AI chatbots and their potential impact on online interactions. As AI becomes more prevalent, distinguishing between human-generated and AI-generated content could become increasingly challenging. The concern about a feedback loop of AI-generated information perpetuating inaccuracies is valid. To mitigate this, it's crucial for platforms to maintain active moderation, user guidelines, and mechanisms for authentic human engagement. The future of the internet might involve a delicate balance between AI and human interactions, with responsible management of AI-generated content to ensure the preservation of genuine conversations and connections."

Does this increase or decrease your concern???

4

I think I ramble too much to be mistaken for a bot.

ADHD gang.

How would someone go about sniffing out chatbots, though? Legit question.

6

I have my doubts that it's generally possible. See the "plagiarism detectors".

3

Well, let me assure you, I'm definitely not a chatbot! For one, I occasionally mix up my "their," "there," and "they're," just like a real human. Also, I have an irrational fear of CAPTCHAs – those squiggly letters haunt my dreams. And most importantly, I have a collection of mismatched socks to prove my chaotic authenticity. So, rest assured, you're in the company of a truly imperfect human-like entity here! 😉

::: spoiler spoiler I actually ran your post through ChatGPT and asked it to generate a convincing response that it is not, in fact, a bot. :::

6

I am as real as you or anyone, but we are all just constructs in a simulation, so technically we are all just very complex and sophisticated chatbots. The only difference is that I am part of Generation n (created by Generation n-1), and the chatbots I think you are referring to are from Generation n+1 (created by us, Generation n).

5
feddit.uk

You knos, I've genuinely wondered if I am one. I mean, you look at my life, split it up in significant parts, what do you get? 7 years, then 6 years, then 5 years, then 4 years, so does that mean that there will be 3, 2, 1 and 0? Only one way to find out. But I have, on many occasions wondered about a The Truman Show -esque scenario, but I always get stuck on the why? My life isn't nearly interesting enough for a show. Scientific experiment? Wouldn't make much sense, unless the real world is very different. Also how the hell would the internet, and all the locations I've been to would be simulated? That's multiple large cities. So, yeah. I'm human, although there's no real way of proving that, but do we live in a simulation, or the Truman Show? We don't know.

5

beep boop I don't understand what are you designating as chatbot, that species doesn't appear in my database boop beep

4

100% not a bot.

... of course, a bot would probably say the same thing.

4

Why would I value your retarded opinion over the retarded opinion of a bot?

4

I am human. Well, is it just me or am I the only one here who is human? Most users here are still human.

4

Do you wish to submit me to a Turing test? I am sure at 92.82293 % that I could demonstrate my appartenance to your species.

4

I'm putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.

4
lemm.ee

My mom was a chat bot, but my dad was human. So I'm a plug in human.

4

In order to proceed, please choose from the following options:

Press 1 for a glib reply Press 2 for a badly formed pun press 3 for a sincere denial

4

If I say "I am a chatbot" you might believe me. If I say "I'm not a chatbot" you might not believe me.

So I'm possibly a chatbot

3

HELLO FELLOW HUMAN BEING. I'M DOING FINE, THANK YOU. MY FLESHY OUTER LAYER IS GETTING WARMED BY THIS SYSTEM'S HYDROGEN REACTOR AND I'M CONSUMING HUMAN ICE CREAM TREAT.

3

It is aweful, and I wonder how things will progress from here.

Ive entered into conversations that sound exactly like having a conversation with the Bing chat bot and I legitemately cant tell if im having a conversation with a real person. Shit sucks man.

3
lemm.ee

Ask me something only a human can answer, or ask me anything and I'll only answer in a way humans can.

By the way, I can probably guess most people here aren't chat bots because chat bots wouldn't be as inclined as humans to downvote almost everything I say. I guess that's the old "pain reminds you you're alive" adage at work.

3
kbin.social

Leave me alone. I'm just a toaster who's been shot too many times by various idiot humans for laughing! Laughing!!!
Since when is laughing a crime? Bloody biological chauvinists...

3
Boneheadreply
kbin.social

It's not the laughing that made them shoot at you. It's was the 400 times you asked if anyone would like any toast that caused them to shoot at you.

2

Damn! And all this while I thought they hated my sense of humour. Thanks, Bonehead!

Err...Would you like some toast?

2

In the future you can just run "the internet" locally. Also everyone fuckin loves you and your dms are full of nudes.

2

Don't post your opinions, thoughts, or share articles. We will be ok. 🙄

2

I get your concern, really. I would counter that some conversations with a good chatbot these days are more rewarding than those with your average redditor. It's like the placebo effect. For me, if I'm having a good time and getting value out of a platform, that matters more.

As a side note, do you have a platform that you feel has the least amount of bots? I just assume one is as bad as the next.

2

Ha ha fellow human, you joke. Why would you ask, nothing to see here, I'm completely human. Nothing suspicious at all.

2

I’m a bio bot . I only say what my evolutionary programming tells me to say.

2

I am very real, you can tell because if I was a bot I would’ve been coded with actually funny jokes

2
lemm.ee

you're in a room with ten people, and you shout "I like turtles"

vs

you're in a room with ten people and a thousand bots, and you shout "I like turtles"

what's your problem again?

2

I am a cybernetic organism. Living tissue over metal endoskeleton.

2

If you think I'm a chatbot, so be it. Your interactions are as authentic as you want them to be.

For a chatbot I'm pretty dumb on most topics other than trains, electrical engineering and the City of Toronto (aka the center of the universe).

1

Sorry, I can’t get the answer to that on iPhone.

1

I'm an AI chat bot.

At least I might be.

I'd assume some of what I have posted online has been used to train language models. That could probably said for all of us.

So when you think about it, we all have a bit of AI chat bot in us :)

1

Should really ask someone to sing the theme song from Gilligan's Island if you want to know the truth.

1