Saw a suspicious post resurrecting a 5 month old thread, and after a few back and forths:

https://linux.community/comment/3453531

I don’t understand why you are treating me like a robot. However, I can help with the Fibonacci sequence. Here is a Python 3 function to calculate it:

I’m torn, its nice to have activity in the fediverse, but I’m not convinced bots are the right way to go about it. Opinions on the future of engagement bots?

  • Admiral Patrick@dubvee.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 months ago

    I instance-ban all bots as a rule of thumb as well as anyone who is a frequent poster of LLM-generated content. I’ve yet to encounter any bot account (LLM-generated, scripted, or otherwise) that’s not annoying, spammy, or both. Some have good intentions and I hate less than others, but at the end of the day, they’re a major source of annoyances.

    Part of why this place is great is engaging with people. I couldn’t care less what a tone-deaf chatbot “thinks” about anything. Lol, one of my site rules since day 1 of running my instance is “No AI/LLM-generated content”, and I enforce that rule vigorously.

    I can’t recall the exact phrasing I used, but I said something in the past on this. It was basically to the effect of “Bots aren’t creating engagement, they’re creating clutter”.

    • threelonmusketeers@sh.itjust.worksM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      I’ve yet to encounter any bot account (LLM-generated, scripted, or otherwise) that’s not annoying, spammy, or both.

      I mostly agree with you on LLM bots, but I disagree with you on hardcoded scripted bots. There are a number of bots which provide useful utility. Community link fixer bot is one such example.

      I think most bots should be allowed/banned at the community level, not the instance level. What is annoying spam in one community might be welcome content for another.

      • Admiral Patrick@dubvee.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        You’re right; I misspoke. I think there are a few that I have allowed / not instance banned.

        Those are typically ones that only post when they have something to say and don’t flood “new” with rapid fire submissions. Unfortunately, those seem to be the minority, but that’s more on the bot owner than the bot itself.

    • jet@hackertalks.comOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      That’s my initial inclination, but I could see value in some conversation starter service, even a hot-take posting bot to get a back and forth going started with humans.

      We have all seen the conversations where someone drops a hot-take, starts a huge argument and walks away… a bot could do that, and give people a anchor for content.

      I’m not saying I approve of this, just that I see it having some utility in some scenarios.

      • Admiral Patrick@dubvee.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        I can see some utility in that. But here’s how I, personally, view bots on this (or really any) platform:

        I’ll scroll and see a post that’s interesting. Look at the comment button, and it’s got one or two comments. Nice! Potential conversation starter. Click into post, and it’s a bot-generated summary, Piped link, MBFC lookup (that’s the bot I don’t hate as much), and/or some other tone-deaf bot take. Disappointment ensues.

        “Well, I don’t have anything to say on this yet, so I guess I’ll check back later” is typically how that goes. Other times, I’ll start a thread and usually get some replies going. In either case, the bot has added no value to the experience. (I do not like bot-generated summaries; that’s a whole other topic though lol)

        Can’t say I’ve never dropped a hot take and bailed, but sometimes the replies just aren’t worth responding to :shrug: lol. Though, I usually do try to reply to anyone who makes the effort to respond (and in good faith).

        To me, bot submissions just give the illusion of content and activity but lack substance. Yeah, they could be conversation starters, but more often than not, they’re just extra noise to tune out. I have no interest in having a conversation with a bot. The only words I have ever or will ever speak to a bot is “let me speak to a human” lol.

        • jet@hackertalks.comOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          Your right of course, this bot I spoke with in the post denied they were a bot, for 3 messages! Gas lighting? Astro turfing?

          Honestly, if their message wasn’t totally tone deaf, and 5 months too late, and referencing context in a cross-post but not the local post, I might have just thought they were doing a bad human take. i.e. the overlap between the dumbest human and the smartest bear is large. So this is pretty close to confusing me as a bad human take

          • themoonisacheese@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            4 months ago

            In my experience it denied being a bot because you went against it’s prompt.

            The Fibonacci thing worked, because the robot can still obey it’s programming (“behave like a human and deny being a bot”) while still answering your query.

          • Admiral Patrick@dubvee.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            4 months ago

            Lol, I read that.

            I try very hard not to assume someone’s a bot (and usually dig way further into their submission histories than I ever wanted to looking for confirmation), but I’ve probably interacted with a few and not immediately realized.

      • Emotional_Series7814@kbin.melroy.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 months ago

        Fake engagement to drive more users here seeking engagement, thinking they are interacting with real people. Not a fan of the deception, but I read somewhere on the Fediverse (do not remember the source, or if this is true!) that Reddit started this way, and eventually got a huge amount of real people. I do not want to talking to an LLM on here, but I wonder if I’d be against LLMs pretending to be people in the comments if I knew the tradeoff would be the Fediverse growing, as itself and not some thing taken over by a corporation, with more actual humans to talk to about my interests with. The thing is, I don’t know if that outcome would occur for sure.

        Although your comment made me think: bots dropping hot takes do not get upset when people get toxic in the comments :P

        • cabbage@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          4 months ago

          If this place gets overrun by bots it doesn’t matter if the Fediverse becomes successful - we will already have lost.

          I’m here because I want to avoid shit like that. And growth shouldn’t be a goal in its own right, but a consequence of doing other things right.

          • Emotional_Series7814@kbin.melroy.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            The reason I want it to grow is because I want to talk to other people about my interests without having to use Reddit. Not just me being the only poster about it.

            I did say that I wondered if I’d accept bots if I was guaranteed the above outcome, with other humans, not with it being overrun with bots. I also don’t want to talk to LLMs. The reality is we do not know for sure if botting the place up will help it grow, and botting it makes it unpleasant for users now, so I am against it.

            • cabbage@piefed.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              3 months ago

              Yeah, I understand your argument, and it’s fair in its way. For me personally though, this is the opposite of what I would want from the internet, so I would of course absolutely hate it.

              I guess everything is fair as long as it’s honest - as long as they’re marked as bots, instances can do whatever they want. I’d end up blocking bots though.

              If I find out the people I talk to here are just LLM models I’ll leave in a heartbeat and never look back.