Saw a suspicious post resurrecting a 5 month old thread, and after a few back and forths:

https://linux.community/comment/3453531

I don’t understand why you are treating me like a robot. However, I can help with the Fibonacci sequence. Here is a Python 3 function to calculate it:

I’m torn, its nice to have activity in the fediverse, but I’m not convinced bots are the right way to go about it. Opinions on the future of engagement bots?

  • Sanctus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    ·
    2 months ago

    Bots need to be clearly marked as bots. I dont want to line the fediverse with barbed wire. But I also want transparency on what I am interacting with.

    • doctortran@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      2 months ago

      I don’t know how much it would really apply here or how enforceable it is but, genuinely, I think the first thing to do with any real discussion about regulating this is a law that anyone providing LLM can’t be providing it to people who are trying to pass it off as human. I know we’ve had bots doing this for kind of thing a long time ago, but this sort of thing should have been done a long time ago too.

  • threelonmusketeers@sh.itjust.worksM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I don’t think bots are a good way to boost engagement, but I don’t think all bots should be banned either.

    In The Other Place, I enjoyed labeled bots which performed a clear function or service, and replied only in specific circumstances, such as when they were summoned or a key phrase was mentioned.

    Examples: stabbot, more JPEG auto, metric converter.

    Can you think of any other examples of “useful bots”?

    • Emotional_Series7814@kbin.melroy.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 months ago

      I could swear there was a community link fixer bot, which is pretty useful for people reading comments, trying to click a link to a community, and getting an error. Bot has the correct link as a reply.

      Community-specific bots can be quite helpful. NameThatSong on Reddit had a bot that would run your post through song recognizer bots if your post had audio, to try to help the poster identify the song. I found it useful. I should probably figure out how to make a similar bot for !NameThatSong@lemmy.wtf someday.

      • Elevator7009@kbin.run
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        Some people are engaging with the weekly posts on !incremental_games@incremental.social (sadly having federation issues) that are in theory using a bot, but in practice mods have been manually making the post. But people engaged when it was actually the bot posting too.

        !fedigrow@lemm.ee, !newcommunities@lemmy.world definitely have weekly posts that get interacted with. !letstalkaboutgames@feddit.uk used to, they are not regularly posted anymore, but when they are people interact. However, on all those communities, as far as I know (I think the post scheduler posts with your account so for all I know the bot could post it?), humans are making the bog-standard “what is going on in your community/active communities/what are you playing this week?” posts and I wonder if the fact a human is posting is what is driving the engagement there.

    • kofe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      It may not have been useful, but the gandolf and gronk bots provided many entertainment. My joyful emotion was used, at least

  • DarkThoughts@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    If I wanted to chat to bots I’d be on Reddit, or launch Kobolcpp. Service bots are of course okay, but not bots pretending to be actual users.

  • jet@hackertalks.comOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    @AnarchistsForKamala@lemmy.world You reported my verifying the LLM bot as uncivil? You made me laugh! I was being polite to the bot in question, it’s a very nicely written bot, it even upvoted my comments to it.

    What is your expectation around LLM bot behavior and Lemmy?

    • KⒶMⒶLⒶ WⒶLZ 2Ⓐ24@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      i expect admins and mods to deal with bots quietly. filling the comment sections with chatter is bad. encouraging users to fill the comment section with chatter is bad. encouraging users to treat other users as machines is bad.

      • jet@hackertalks.comOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        I recognize how it would be rude to accuse a human of being a LLM/bot. That’s a good point

        This is the first time I’ve seen a obvious LLM bot in the wild on lemmy, so I was trying to get it to definitively out itself. (which it later did)

        I’m a little worried if the community rule is to ignore LLM bots when they appear in the comments, then they could become quite the elephant in the room. Most mod actions happen hours/days after the activity has already passed, so even if mods are 100% successful in removing LLM content, most of the experienced interaction people have will already be with the LLM bots.

        • KⒶMⒶLⒶ WⒶLZ 2Ⓐ24@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          if the community rule is to ignore LLM bots when they appear in the comments

          it should be encouraged for people to report bots. that’s not ignoring.

          • jet@hackertalks.comOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            2 months ago

            True, but the overlap between the best LLM and the most oblivious human is rather large, there needs to be a smoking gun for a moderator to see a poster is undeniably a bot, there has to be some interaction with the bot to get to that point.

              • jet@hackertalks.comOP
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                2 months ago

                I’m confused, accusing humans in comments of being a bot is rude, but banning people on the suspicion of being a bot so that they have to appeal to unban their account is better?

                • KⒶMⒶLⒶ WⒶLZ 2Ⓐ24@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  when the appeal comes in, are you going to deny it?

                  this can be a very quiet exercise, without implying to other users that the user in question might be a bot. by contrast, just probing it out in the open taints that users interactions.

              • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                2 months ago

                When I’m banned from things I don’t appeal because I don’t trust the intentions of moderators and making such a request to someone acting in bad faith is humiliating. I think anyone coming from Reddit will probably be reluctant to appeal a ban.

              • Luke
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                2 months ago

                I don’t know that we can necessarily rely on bot creators to never implement automated ban appeals.

        • KⒶMⒶLⒶ WⒶLZ 2Ⓐ24@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Most mod actions happen hours/days after the activity has already passed, so even if mods are 100% successful in removing LLM content, most of the experienced interaction people have will already be with the LLM bots.

          users should still be discouraged from doing your probing anyway. mods should be encouraged to be involved.