I get that standpoint, if that’s all you get but on this community, you get bots and also real users here that also creat posts, combine the two then factor in the conversations that form in the comments.
I get that standpoint, if that’s all you get but on this community, you get bots and also real users here that also creat posts, combine the two then factor in the conversations that form in the comments.
donuts@kbin.social 1 year ago
By getting a bot to automatically post articles (or worse, comments) you're decreasing the need/opportunity for human beings to post, which makes the entire website less engaging on an individual level.
Sure there might be more "content", but less human-to-human interaction. And personally I feel that genuine human-to-human interaction is only going to become more important with the propagation of mediocre AI generated content. Even thinking in terms of "supply and demand", unlimited bot-created content has very little value compared to increasingly rare human-to-human interaction.
Maybe it's just me, but I'd rather a sub/mag be totally empty than full of AI-generated bot content, because even though it's not ideal it at least gives people like you and me the opportunity to meaningfully participate.
rob299@lemmy.world 1 year ago
absolutely, so lets say for instance, a bot posts an article, what stops people from discussing that tech news arcticle in the comments, and a bot might not get every piece of news, so users can then creat posts to fill in those blanks. I guess an argument could be made that less people would make posts, but then if there are no bots at all, there that chance that at some point that people just stop using Lemmy and go back to tradition social platforms because they feel there isn’t as much content.
so when you look at it on both sides; bots, or no bots, both have their potential bad sides. but also potential benefits.