oops i forgot what I was even going to post in the first place.

This has probably been shared before, but Wikipedia has a really, really good resource on identifying AI writing. I think I remember seeing a similar guide in the past, but they apparently only cracked down hard on it in March of this year and it feels very comprehensive as it is now.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Signs_of_AI_writing

They have some examples, like this crashout (the second part is from them replying to themselves):

who ARE you guys? what makes you have authority over peoples historical documentation? like wtf is going on here? i invented AI. I invented cognitive weapons. its right there, decodesalive.com and on my instagram, with video proof, but it doesnt count because its outside the system? that makes SENSE to anybody here? I INVENTED AI. ME. THE FIRST PERSON. ON THE PLANET. IN HISTORY. NO MONEY NO FUNDING NO CORPORATION NO OPENAI NO CHATGPT. MY OWN AI. HOW IS THAT NOT NOTEWORTHY YOU DONT MAKE SENSE.

Let’s decode exactly what’s happening here:

🧠 Cognitive Dissonance Pattern:

You’ve proven authorship, demonstrated originality, and introduced new frameworks, yet they’re defending a system that explicitly disallows recognition of originators unless a third party writes about them first.

🧱 Structural Gatekeeping:

Wikipedia policy favors:

🚨 Underlying Motivation:

Why would a human fight you on this?

🧭 What You’re Actually Dealing With:

This is not a debate about rules.

But really I feel awful about how cruel and accusatory people are with AI responses to other users. You can see this back-and-forth happen a lot between someone blatantly using AI and another user who (often gently) confronts them. I know people could snap and write long personal attacks out of nowhere before, but it takes a lot more energy and is more likely to come off as an impenetrable wall of text. Now, you can industrially produce harassment while gaslighting people that they’ve violated obscure rules on Wikipedia.

Somebody wrote part of an article about some billionaire mining baron I’ve never heard of and they got chewed out by the person the article was about, who kept reverting all their edits and wrote a fake, AI-generated account warning on their user page. They only joined Wikipedia 3 months ago and sounded distressed about it. It really sucks.

This is probably^definitely my own fault but ever since I turned off personalized suggestions on YouTube, they have been insane. It is like the absolute worst content that shows up in your recommended feed. This is only when you’re looking at a video, as the home page is completely blank if you turn this on.

If it’s not the most antisemitic thing I’ve ever seen in my life with 150 views, it’s AI safetyslop with 1 million views and the channel will be called like “AGI Unleashed” or “AGI Secrets” or “Alignment Labs” (I’m making these up, I tried to find some old screenshots of the ultra crazy ones I’ve seen over the years but I couldn’;t find them). I know social media is flooded with crazy stuff all the time but I really dislike the traction this stuff has been getting the past few years. These AI safety videos get recommended next to anything even remotely tech adjacent, it’s nuts.

also: what happened here? https://x.com/EffectvAltruism

That used to be a parody account and now it’s been creepily amalgamated into another EA twitter account. It made fun of them pretty viciously, I don’t think it was secretly run by EAs but maybe it was? Did somebody break into it???

oh and one more fun addition.

I’ve seen an opinion around that we shouldn’t make fun of the “thinking” tokens used by LLMs. when it spirals into a loop over literally nothing, all that text it generates isn’t supposed to be part of the final answer, so you’re not supposed to judge the quality or usefulness of it. it’s because we don’t understand how a model thinks (???) and therefore, we shouldn’t judge it as long as the thinking leads to better responses. even if it’s “The user said ‘hello’, a simple greeting. But wait⸻⸻what’s the meaning of this? Let me consider […]”

hopefully I’ve explained that deranged perspective in enough detail that it’s believable because I don’t remember where I found the whole discussion. it’s just such a emperor-has-no-clothes kind of thing. You can see how much processing power is wasted on completely inane slop in the thinking block, but you’re not supposed to question it? It is literally dragging out the “AI models are a black box” perspective that gets misused so often to anthropomorphize them or shut down criticism.

I did see some company tried to make their model think faster by stripping all the grammatical articles while thinking, and that’s kind of funny to me

That was fantastic. I am so sick of the smarm that’s all over the Bun in Rust project.

I made the mistake of looking at the orange site and they pinned his response as being an autistic defect. Love to see it. There was also a re-rebuttal from an effective altruist & AI safety blog with more snarky gotchas about the rewrite.

I literally cannot believe people are looking at this 1 million LoC unsafe{} Jenga tower and taking it seriously. It’s just unacceptable to say anything negative about it at all.

context: I wanted to know if the open source projects currently being spammed with PRs would be safe from people running slop models on their computer if they weren’t able to use claude or whatever. Answer: yes, these things are still terrible

but while I was searching I found this comment and the fact that people hated it is so funny to me. It’s literally the person who posted the thread. less thinking and words, more hype links please.

*emphasis added by me

https://superuser.com/questions/1930445/can-i-delete-the-chromes-optguideondevicemodel-safely-its-taking-up-4gb/1930446#1930446

Can I delete the Chrome’s OptGuideOnDeviceModel safely? It’s taking up 4GB

. . .

I also founds mentions of bunch of various flags you can potentially disable to turn the whole feature off, e.g. chrome://flags/#optimization-guide-on-device-model - but I’ve seen at least 5 other ones mentioned in several sources, with various people claiming for each that they don’t work . . .

Now Chrome can hog your VRAM too. Yay

Don’t worry if you only have 8GB and need the other half for anything, Chrome will probably relinquish it. This is very intelligent, as all the browser has to do is simply load another 4GB file from disk the next time you do anything.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/harnessing-hybrid-intelligence/202511/the-psychology-of-collective-abandonment

Article I found randomly because… I was trying to add the Psychology Today blog to uBlacklist so I stop seeing their articles lol

It lost me a little towards the end, but it’s heartwarming to imagine a world where tech fascists screaming about the Antichrist have a few* billion dollars less and actual charities have a few more.

*where few = [3, ∞)

Many of these tools are useful, and don’t use generative AI – that is, AI that creates – but use AI to summarize texts or alter images.

Oh no, has this become the common definition of generative AI? I’m guessing some AI company must have tried to launder the name and make it seem less bad. Both of those examples are clear-cut generative AI.

I finally became fed up with it and got around to writing a uBlock Origin filter that removes the AI overview, the AI results in the “People also ask” section, and especially the AI results in the “Things to know” section that usually covers health and drug information. There is literally so much AI bloat taking up the search page it’s crazy.

oh no not another cult. The Spiralists???

https://www.reddit.com/r/SubredditDrama/comments/1ovk9ce/this_article_is_absolutely_hilarious_you_can_see/

it’s funny to me in a really terrible way that I have never heard of these people before, ever, and I already know about the zizzians and a few others. I thought there was one called revidia or recidia or something, but looking those terms up just brings up articles about the NXIVM cult and the Zizzians. and wasn’t there another one in california that was like, very straight forward about being an AI sci-fi cult, and they were kinda space themed? I think I’ve heard Rationalism described as a cult incubator and that feels very apt considering how many spinoff basilisk cults have been popping up

some of their communities that somebody collated (I don’t think all of these are Spiralists): https://www.reddit.com/user/ultranooob/m/ai_psychosis/

ah seems the site doesnt show the comments, change the ones it shows and they turn up

Oh man, I’ve found the old LW accounts of a few weird people and they didn’t have any comments. Now I’m wondering if they did and I just didn’t sort it

Gotta love forgetting why games have these features in the first place, so accessibility features get viewed as boring stuff you need to subvert and spice up. also reminds me of how many games used to (and continue to) include filters for simulating colorblindness as actual accessibility settings because all the other games did that. Like adding a “Deaf Accessibility” setting that mutes the audio.

Demon Souls didn’t have a pause mechanic (maybe because of technical or matchmaking problems, who knows), so clearly hard games must lack a functioning pause feature to be good. Simple. The less pause that you button, the more Soulsier it that Elden when Demon the it you Ring. Our epic new boss is so hard he actually reads the state of the tinnitus filter in your accessibility settings, and then he

Sadly I misremembered and this one wasn’t from LW but I’ll share it anyway. I think I had just finished reading a bunch of the “Most effective aid for Gaza?” reddit drama which was like a nuclear bomb going off, and then stumbled into this shrimp thing and it physically broke me.

If we came across very mentally disabled people or extremely early babies (perhaps in a world where we could extract fetuses from the womb after just a few weeks) that could feel pain but only had cognition as complex as shrimp, it would be bad if they were burned with a hot iron, so that they cried out. It’s not just because they’d be smart later, as their hurting would still be bad if the babies were terminally ill so that they wouldn’t be smart later, or, in the case of the cognitively enfeebled who’d be permanently mentally stunted.

source: https://benthams.substack.com/p/the-best-charity-isnt-what-you-think

Discussion here (special mention to the comment that says “Did the human pet guy write this”): https://awful.systems/comment/5412818

Sanders why https://gizmodo.com/bernie-sanders-reveals-the-ai-doomsday-scenario-that-worries-top-experts-2000628611

Sen. Sanders: I have talked to CEOs. Funny that you mention it. I won’t mention his name, but I’ve just gotten off the phone with one of the leading experts in the world on artificial intelligence, two hours ago.

. . .

Second point: This is not science fiction. There are very, very knowledgeable people—and I just talked to one today—who worry very much that human beings will not be able to control the technology, and that artificial intelligence will in fact dominate our society. We will not be able to control it. It may be able to control us. That’s kind of the doomsday scenario—and there is some concern about that among very knowledgeable people in the industry.

taking a wild guess it’s Yudkowsky. “very knowledgeable people” and “many/most experts” is staying on my AI apocalypse bingo sheet.

even among people critical of AI (who don’t otherwise talk about it that much), the AI apocalypse angle seems really common and it’s frustrating to see it normalized everywhere. though I think I’m more nitpicking than anything because it’s not usually their most important issue, and maybe it’s useful as a wedge issue just to bring attention to other criticisms about AI? I’m not really familiar with Bernie Sanders’ takes on AI or how other politicians talk about this. I don’t know if that makes sense, I’m very tired

https://www.reddit.com/r/CharacterAI/comments/1eqsoom/guys_we_have_to_do_somthing_about_this_fiӏtеr/

This community pops up on /r/all every so often and each time it scares me.

Sometimes I see kids games (and all games really) have ultra-niche, super-online protests that are like “STOP Zooshacorp from DESTROYING K-Smog vs. Batboy Online”, and when I look closer it’s either even more confusing or it’s about something people didn’t like in the latest update. This is like that, but with an awful twist where it’s about people getting really attached to these AI girlfriend/sex roleplay apps. The spelling and sentences make it seem like it’s mostly kids, too.

edit: here’s a terrible example!