• wulrus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Sad thing is that in this day and age, they’d hardly need to lift a finger to have this rephrased 100 times. But they know they don’t have to. People eat up the garbage from their feed, people (often the same) know that a lot of it is Russian bots.

    p. s: Still surprised how poorly ChatGPT-5 Thinking handled this. A lot of obvious bot content, such as “weeks of uncut videos and policy dives” by a Democrat, “attended a live event” etc.

    • theneverfox@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 day ago

      At this point, I think it’s a feature. Just like how when Russia does propaganda, they lie so big it’s easily disproven, so once someone bites down on it they’re pulled into a fake world

      The old style of US propaganda was to flood the zone - bury what you want to hide out in the open and add so much more information people can’t be bothered to learn about it.

      The new style (even before chat gpt) seems to be an ocean of bots and bullshit. Who cares if you can spot a bot if you already don’t trust anyone online? It’s destroying organic communication so we’re forced to go to a central source, which are controlled

    • tempest@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      The thing to understand is that people don’t see outside of their silos.

      While it’s obvious when you line then up like that most people will never see that posts. The interact with social media passively and they’re likely to only see one of those posts as they scroll.

      • wulrus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        I’ve also fallen for and followed a fake account before. It was some neckbeard pretending to be a female disabled doctor. Apparently, he actually was some kind of advocate for the disabled, possibly started with the self-justification to “help”.

        Oh wow, apparently it was a bigger deal than I thought back then: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jule_Stinkesocke

        Is the one about Kirk unbelievable? Some parts, yes, such as the immediate registration as Republican (not shown in screenshots), but in general, there are favorable non-Republican responses, such as “Shoe on Head”. I’m also upset about quotes out of context, that part seems to be real, and so it builds a bridge from reality to fiction. It’s just that I wouldn’t turn full MAGA because Stephen King smeared a conservative.

        • Bane_Killgrind@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          Stink e sock e? And the name was fake?

          Before I sarcastically say I’m shocked I should look up if it’s a real surname… No dice. Gamers and a furaffinity account appears to be referencing the person, and there’s a children’s book that includes the word in the title.

          So without further ado, I’M SHOCKED! SHOCKED I SAY!!!

          • wulrus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            It was a shock, and my faith in the internet will be lost entirely if it turns out that your name is not actually Killgrind.

            (Her supposed real name was Julia Goethe Gothe, in case anyone wants to know. Former Twitter handle @JuleStinkesocke.)