This again assumes that quantity is more valuable than quality. one tweet from a major influencer, like say elon musk, will have more of an impact than one million ai generated comments.
Not to mention that the returns on generated content are diminishing. Ten fake accounts spreading a message will be more effective than one. But at some point, the value from adding a new one goes down.
It doesn't matter if ai makes it cheap to mass produce good enough versions of anything, at least not over the long term. The dynamics of creative content consumption aren't driven by quantity alone
I'd argue that the incredibly fast rise in quality over the last year alone is what most people are interested in. DALLE and GPT-2 were always able to make heaps of trash. The trajectory of the quality of DALLE-N and GPT-N is what interests me in terms of the AI internet...
>one tweet from a major influencer, like say elon musk, will have more of an impact than one million ai generated comments.
So all I need to achieve Musk's level of influence is to generate a million comments with AI? At 12 comments per second, the AI would do it in a day. That's a scary power, if you ask me.
Difference is that Musk issues one message to all his followers
A million comments generated by a few hundred thousand GPT accounts say a lot of different things to a lot of different people, and you exercise very little control over that. The dumb bots that just like and retweet the messages from your main account(s) until people start organically taking notice of them are more useful for influence-generating.
Not to mention that the returns on generated content are diminishing. Ten fake accounts spreading a message will be more effective than one. But at some point, the value from adding a new one goes down.
It doesn't matter if ai makes it cheap to mass produce good enough versions of anything, at least not over the long term. The dynamics of creative content consumption aren't driven by quantity alone