True in a way. However, there is a rather large collection of speculation on the Internet that is quite an undertaking to correct. And a large population of people and bots willing to speculate. Also, having once been speculated, each speculation takes on a life of its own. If it gets much more substantial, forget Skynet, we’re busy creating Specunet and its sidekick Confusionet – an insidious duo.
This looks to be more an endorsement of moderation principles and rules, not determining truth of comments.
For the difficulties in determining what’s true, see the kerfuffle about Media Bias Fact Check.
Yet use AI (possibly) to determine users’ AI answers.
Let’s extend this thought experiment a little. Consider just forum posts; the numbers will be somewhat similar for articles and other writings, as well as photos and videos.
A bot creates how many more posts than a human? Being (ridiculously) conservative, we’ll say 10x more.
On day one: 10 humans are posting (for simplicity’s sake) 10 times a day, totaling 100 posts. Bot is posting 100 a day. For a total of 200 human and bot posts; 50% of which are the bot.
In your (extended) example, at the end of a year: 10 humans are still posting 100 times a day. The 10 bots are posting a total of 1000 times a day. Bots are at 90%, humans 10%.
This statistic can lead you to think human participation in the Internet is difficult to find.
Returning to reality, consider how inhuman AI bots are, with each probably able to outpost humans by millions or billions of times under millions of aliases each. If you find search engines, articles, forums, reviews, and such are bonkers now, just wait a few years. Predicting general chaotic nonsense for the Internet is a rational conclusion, with very few islands of humanity. Unless bots are stopped.
Right now though, bots are increasing.
nearly did a push-up
Sounds more like: couldn’t do a push-up.
The arguments are pretty spot on (with plenty of exceptions, e.g. efforts to privatize healthcare in each country; but we’re generalizing here), not so much the conclusion:
not sure why you’re talking about expanding the very thing we’re politically unable to sustain as if it’s a way to sidestep the problem.
Unsustainable: US healthcare for profit. Evidence: Most expensive healthcare in the world with average or worse results.
Sustainable: Universal healthcare for everyone. Evidence: Every other country in North America, Europe, Australia, parts of Africa and South America.
The US is already among the worst for infant mortality (bottom 4th among North American and Western European countries). The downward-trend causes and solutions are interrelated and complex, and include (and aren’t limited to):
None of the problems are a surprise, they are the predictable consequences of choices. None of the solutions are flawless, even while they head in a more public direction.
Another place to start: Privacy Guides has a history of tracking quite a variety of computer networking tools (browsers, data providers, Internet services, software, hardware, desktop and phone, even operating systems),