A Boring Dystopia

Sadly, I'm not too surprised. Check this shit out, published back in November 2025: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2510.25137.

"We simulated 151 million American workers [using LLMs] to see what proportion of tasks they do that can also be done by AI".

Much more recently, Esquire couldn't get ahold of an actor for an interview and so decided to generate the actors responses using Claude: https://esquiresg.com/mackenyu-one-piece-roronoa-zoro-interview/.

We had the photospread, but nothing directly uttered by the 29-year-old. With a driving need for a feature, we had to be inventive. Harnessing our creative license, we pulled his verbatim from previous interviews and fed them through an AI programme to formulate new responses.

Are these the words we expect from Mackenyu? Or are they just replies from an echo chamber of celebrity-hood that we want to believe is from him?

With the absence of information, can new insights be gained?

Nature abhors a vacuum, and in its place, a story fills the hollow.

Somehow it is currently accepted by a certain portion of people that LLM-based systems can be used to replace actually existing human beings.

This might be the dumbest fucking thing I've ever heard.

I could go even cheaper by just thinking about it really hard and guessing

Why bother asking people when you can just ask AI to make answers.

Great, so now they're outsourcing our own fucking opinions to them

Ah, yes, lies.

Any scientific publications accidentally posting an article not based on the actual scientific method should be immediately punished by law or we are lost. It's time they used the hordes of money they accumulated during the easy part to now prove themselves and perform their actual function in society.

You know what else costs a fraction of traditional polling and takes a fraction of the time?

Lying, making shit up. Which conveniently is basically what AI slop does, and having a person lie is even cheaper than licensing some random AI to do it.

That's fucking stupid.

Is there a community for cataloging tech bullshit like "silicon sampling"? If not I'll make one. First thought c/techbrobabble

EDIT: 'tis done !techbrobabble@piefed.blahaj.zone

What the actual fuck??

I have an environment friendly alternative to this method. It involves tea leaves…

It costs less to make shit up that "mimics" the real information. Who would have thought

Holy fuck. It can simulate large samplings or it can just hallucinate some nonsensical BS that completely misinterprets the data it gathers in order to agree with the phrasing of the person who created the prompt.

Do the majority of people trust their doctors and nurses? Maybe. Or, maybe it depends on the context of the question.

Do I trust my doctors and nurses are a better source of information than random internet advice and AI generated slop? I would hope so.

Do I trust that the American healthcare system is set up to prioritize the health and well-being of the patient over maximizing profits and forcing healthcare workers to adhere to standardized time allotments of 10 to 15 minutes for every patient interaction regardless of the individual case? Absolutely not.

“opinions” formed from a mix of stolen books and movie scripts, terminally online shutins and fanfic writers, and politics comment sections cannot be considered a holistic look at humanity.

We’re absolutely going extinct. I’m out of hope at this point.

Misleading title, Axios did not do this, but rather the referenced a study that they later discovered did this.

It’s on them for not learning this sooner, but let’s not act like they’re the ones who sent it up to try and manipulate political reporting.

Cool, so everything is just fucking made up now. Why even bother with the AI at that point? Just make up stats that say what you want right there on the spot. Its the same fucking different. Bullshit from humans or bullshit from AI, its all still bullshit.

Crossposting to fuck_ai if you don't mind.

You wouldn’t know my survey results, she goes to another school

Unfucking believable that a legitimate media outlet would do such a thing. That’s some Breitbart shit.

63% of all statistics are made up on the spot

Making shit up, but with extra steps.

Ever notice that they're just doing what Clavicular or whatever his name is doing? They're inventing lingo to sound like its not bullshit.

Its not hitting yourself with a hammer its looksmaxxing. Its not standing around being a dork, its mogging. Its not a context window, its the chat scrollback. Its not asking chatgpt its "silicon sampling".

They're making it seem legit by making its own terminology and in-group lingo.

Bullshit artists.