Definitely something I’ve observed even here. Luckily we get few applications and there is a report button, but I share the author’s frustration and the author’s jaded view of a limited timeline on services such as ours being tenable. Eventually it will be trivially easy to flood this place with slop.
The Future of Forums is Lies, I Guess
Submitted 3 weeks ago by alyaza@beehaw.org to technology@beehaw.org
https://aphyr.com/posts/389-the-future-of-forums-is-lies-i-guess
Comments
Gaywallet@beehaw.org 3 weeks ago
theangriestbird@beehaw.org 3 weeks ago
Question: what would happen if the server implemented something like Anubis on the application and/or create post pages? Would that not block most bots from completing these forms? Is that just not feasible at our scale?
t3rmit3@beehaw.org 3 weeks ago
I think Anubis is really focused on scraper-bots feeding AI models, rather than posting bots. It’s based on requests to non-standard endpoints in your own app, which you specify for Anubis in a couple places (e.g. leaving out of /robots.txt or /.well-known).
If you’re using e.g. a python bot that uses headless chromium executing JS to post stuff, you’re probably going to code in known-good endpoints for comments and posts, rather than hitting random ones like a scraper bot would.
Anubis is good for stopping the n-request-per-second spamming of scrapers, but not so much for just blocking non-human bots that post at normal rates.
Kolanaki@pawb.social 2 weeks ago
OneRedFox@beehaw.org 2 weeks ago
The future is probably going to be:
- Whitelist federation models with invite-only instances.
- Anubis and similar software being a base requirement for operation.
- Getting creative with stuff like picture-based logic puzzles as a type of captcha.
- A retreat into less publicly visible spaces like chat apps that you can only get access to through networking.
Gaywallet@beehaw.org 2 weeks ago
Eh frankly I just see us moving to more strict reputation based systems - someone has to vouch for you.
who@feddit.org 3 weeks ago
I wonder if a user reputation system based on your votes of other people’s comments, and influenced by votes from folks who have earned enough upvotes from you, could be developed without turning your feed into an echo chamber like Facebook. Sort of like PageRank, but for fediverse users instead of web pages.
Novocirab@feddit.org 2 weeks ago
Besides trying to find better ways at recognizing bots, we also need to invent ways that make it quicker to recognize “false alarm, this user is in all likelihood legit”.
For example, users should have the possibilities to pin posts and comments to their profile, and I suggest that users have at least two different ‘tabs’ in their profile for this: One tab just for the usual “posts / comments you would like other people to see”, but another tab for “some recent, complex interactions between you and other (established) users that in your eyes make it quite clear you’re not a bot”. The purpose is simply to save others, worried about you being a bot, some time of going through your posts in search of signs of humanity. Yes, this can be gamed to some degree (what can’t?). However, at a technical level, the feature is just a copy of the “pin” feature would be very nice to have anyways, so we can get an appreciable improvement in our ability to tell users from bots for very little programming effort.
HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 2 weeks ago
Except that spammers can curate that set of posts and comments similar to legit users.
Novocirab@feddit.org 2 weeks ago
Like I said: it can be gamed to some degree, but what system can’t?
ordinarylove@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 weeks ago
believe that i’ve seen versions of this attack where the spammer makes a few innocuous non-spam (but not contribution either) posts before going full LLM bot
A more critical weakness is that these accounts only posted obvious spam; they made no effort to build up a plausible persona. Generating plausible human posts is more difficult, but broadly feasible with current LLM technology.
Megaman_EXE@beehaw.org 2 weeks ago
I was going to say “but someone could post a picture with the date and their username” and then realized that can be spoofed. And then I thought what about some kind of video? Wait that could probably be spoofed too.
Maybe you could have it so only real people could get in via word of mouth? But eventually I’m sure someone with bad intentions could enter
memfree@beehaw.org 3 weeks ago
Ouch. I’d never want to tell someone ‘Denied. I think you’re a bot.’ – but I really hate the number of bots already out there. I was fine with the occasional bots that would provide a wiki-link and even the ones who would reply to movie quotes with their own quotes. Those were obvious and you could easily opt to ignore/hide their accounts. As the article states, the particular bot here was also easy to spot once they got in the door, but the initial contact could easily have been human and we can expect bots to continuously seem human as AI improves.
Bots are already driving policy decisions in government by promoting/demoting particular posts and writing their own comments that can redirect conversations. They make it look like there is broad consensus for the views they’re paid to promote, and at least some people will take that as a sign that the view is a valid option (ad populum).
Sometimes it feels like the internet is a crowd of bots all shouting at one another and stifling the humans trying to get a word in. The tricky part is that I WANT actual unpaid humans to tell me what they actually: like/hate/do/avoid. I WANT to hear actual stories from real humans. I don’t want to find out the ‘Am I the A-hole?’ story getting everyone so worked up was an ‘AI-hole’ experiment in manipulating emotions.
I wish I could offer some means to successfully determine human vs. generated content, but the only solutions I’ve come up with require revealing real-world identities to sites, and that feels as awful as having bots. Otherwise, I imagine that identifying bots will be an ever escalating war akin to Search Engine Optimization wars.