this post was submitted on 14 Jun 2025
597 points (97.8% liked)

Greentext

8321 readers
476 users here now

This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.

Be warned:

If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] BigBananaDealer@lemm.ee 144 points 11 months ago (2 children)

in fact, this green text was made purely from asking chatgpt what ai will look like in 10 years

[–] starman2112@sh.itjust.works 42 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Unironically the best greentext I ever read was the bottomless pit one written by AI

That was like 3 years ago when generative AI was fun and whimsical

[–] kogasa@programming.dev 29 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The last time I had fun with LLMs was back when GPT2 was cutting-edge, I fine-tuned GPT2-Medium on Twitch chat logs and it alternates between emote spam, complete incoherence, blatantly unhinged comments, and suspiciously normal ones. The bot is still in use as a toy, specifically because it's deranged and unpredictable. It's like a kaleidoscope for the slice of internet subculture it was trained on, much more fun than a plain flawless mirror.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Fizz@lemmy.nz 10 points 11 months ago

The first ai green texts made me laugh so much. They managed to perfectly capture the essence of a green text but because they were dumb they would create the most weird situations.

[–] TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today 68 points 11 months ago (3 children)

This guy bought so many rare monkey tokens. Ai is impressive in some aspects, but it's not nearly as impressive as the marketing that drives the massive amounts of investment into it.

The US economy is doing anything it can to create growth, which is causing investors to create a bubble around AI that is "too big to fail".

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] nailbar@sopuli.xyz 52 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (4 children)

I wonder if personal websites with links to each other, like in the olden days, will start growing in popularity again because of how trust is slowly eroded for anything not in your direct control, and search engines becoming more and more useless 🤔

[–] laranis@lemmy.zip 11 points 11 months ago (1 children)

But, but, how will we monetize it? How!?

/s

I long for the early 2k internet. So much potential positivity for humanity.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] sandflavoured@lemm.ee 7 points 11 months ago

Same here! This will be the way for me.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] IndiBrony@lemmy.world 45 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (6 children)

I think this vastly overestimates the average person's ability to recognise or even care to recognise what is AI and what is not.

You've got all those videos on Facebook which are BLATANTLY AI and the comment section is split between "wow, amazing!" and "it's AI you fucking morons"

The latter will eventually leave the platform and the former will be all that's left.

[–] breecher@sh.itjust.works 16 points 11 months ago (1 children)

And it is not going to take 10 years. It is right around the corner.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Fizz@lemmy.nz 7 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Then new people will grow up in an environment where its only the wow amazing people and they never hear from the its ai you moron people.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] ijedi1234@sh.itjust.works 34 points 11 months ago (2 children)

This has already happened, many years ago. I know this because everyone but me is actually a highly sophisticated robot that resembles a member of my species. I'm onto you.

[–] ddplf@szmer.info 13 points 11 months ago (2 children)

When I was a kid I had a theory that I'm the only conscient being in the world, and that everyone is some sort of a robot.

I couldn't share it with anyone, because obviously no one was real but me.

[–] insomniac@sh.itjust.works 16 points 11 months ago (2 children)

He figured it out. Time to shut it down.

[–] AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago

Finally. This iteration was starting to become weird anyway.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Turret3857@infosec.pub 8 points 11 months ago

you can't trick me machine. You can't convince me I am the robot and you are the conscious. it can't be possible.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] nebulaone@lemmy.world 25 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (4 children)

Reputation and PGP signatures could be used to verify real human made content. That is, of course, if people actually care, which I think will be rare.

There might be no-ai communities, that require this and are closed down to avoid being scraped for ai training.

Edit: Also AI is already enshittifiying itself, which might get worse if it becomes more widespread than it already is.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Why couldn't AI use PGP signatures that suggest they're human?

[–] groet@feddit.org 12 points 11 months ago

Its not about "just having a signature". Its about a web of trust. It only works if you verify if the key belongs to a creator that is actually a person.

Basically creators go to a convention and hand out their public key in person and have other creators sign their key. If you trust creator A is real and they signed the key of creator B, you can have some trust B is also real. And if your buddy went to the convention, met A and B, got their public keys and tells you they are real you can also trust they are real. The more steps/signatures you are away from a creator the less trustworthy they are and nothing really ensures a (human) creator doesn't use AI secretly. If somebody is found to be a fraud everyone has to distrust their key.

[–] PieMePlenty@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

Trust is the most important part. You trust someone they made something themselves. They digitally sign their work with a public key that is known to be theirs. You can now verify they (the person you trust) made it.
Once the trusted creator's key is leaked, they are no longer trusted for future works.
AI made content can be freely signed as well, but if you don't trust the origin, the signature doesn't matter anyway since it will just verify it is coming from the AI creator.
The key thing is trust, the signature is just there to verify.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] elvis_depresley@sh.itjust.works 23 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Part of the fun of watching stuff isn't because it "customised to me" it's sharing an experience with the creator(s) and friends, family etc.

I see genAI being used as a tool for creators but not as an automation of content creation.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] SethTaylor@lemmy.world 22 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Actually, polls show that most people are not fond of AI-generated content and want it to be labelled or don't want it at all.

As for generating your own entertainment at home, see interactive movies. They did not take off because people don't want to be "working" for their entertainment. That's their time to relax and not make decisions.

All in all, we're not as careless as it may seem.

[–] ICastFist@programming.dev 6 points 11 months ago

Not to mention those interactive movies from the early 90s games that also didn't take off because they were sorely lacking in the game department

[–] Taleya@aussie.zone 6 points 11 months ago

A fb group i moderate recently had an AI jammed up it. I ran a poll to keep or disable. "Get rid of it" got more votes than the option "Put a gimp mask on it and whore it out for grapefruit"

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] halvar@lemy.lol 19 points 11 months ago (4 children)

I personally doubt that will happen, since the current models require a lot of data to get better, something we actually don't have. The real danger is what happens once we figure out how to make models without an absurd amount of data.

[–] irelephant@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 11 months ago

As well as that, the internet is less reliable since there's a lot more botshit on it.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Rossphorus@lemmy.world 14 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Video evidence is relatively easy to fix, you just need camera ICs to cryptographically sign their outputs. If the image/video is tampered with (or even re-encoded) the signature won't match. As the private key is (hopefully!) stored securely in the hardware IC taking the photo/video, any generated images or videos can't be signed by such a private key.

[–] topherclay@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago (6 children)

So whatever way the camera output is being signed, what's stopping you from signing an altered video with a similar private key and then saying "you can all trust that my video is real because I have the private key for it."

The doubters will have to concede that the video did indeed come from you because it pairs with your key, but why would anyone trust that the key came from the camera step instead of coming from the editing step?

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 7 points 11 months ago (2 children)

You can enter the camera as evidence, and prove that it has been used for other footage. Each camera should have a unique key to be effective.

So if you create a new key, it won't match the one on am existing camera. If you steal the key, then once that's discovered, the camera should generate a new one.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Taleya@aussie.zone 6 points 11 months ago (12 children)

Mate, digital cinema uses this encryption /decryption method for KDMs.

The keys are tied into multiple physical hardware ids, many of which (such as player/.projector ) are also married cryptographically. Any deviation along a massive chain and you get no content.

Those playback keys are produced from DKDMs that are insanely tightly controlled. The DKDM production itself even more so.

And that's just to play a movie. This is proven tech, decades old. You're not gonna break it with premiere.

load more comments (12 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] rabber@lemmy.ca 13 points 11 months ago

I like to think humans will go back to interacting with each other in person thanks to AI destroying the internet

[–] WILSOOON@programming.dev 12 points 11 months ago

Skynut is coming, in all its smutty glory and we can do nothing about it

[–] yournamehere@lemm.ee 11 points 11 months ago

email. gmail already summarizes every mail by default in the US. most emails are bot spam. ppl start using ai bots to answer emails. is that the internet of things?

[–] alligalli@feddit.org 9 points 11 months ago

Time to get up and go outside :)

[–] starman2112@sh.itjust.works 9 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

>I have long-since decided to stop watching new media altogether, opting instead for anime that I downloaded and hoarded before 2030, that I can verify was made before generative AI gained popularity

And I'm open to recommendations, I need to stockpile a good 30 years worth of content and I only have like 2 right now

[–] Phoenix3875@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I have a friend that does a rolling schedule on her hoarded old media, which according to her, is sufficient for the rest of her life.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] match@pawb.social 8 points 11 months ago

We should get polaroids and analog film again

[–] Dogyote@slrpnk.net 8 points 11 months ago

Simetimes I think the future will resemble the pre-internet era. AI content will be so easy to create that the zone will be flooded with shit, and only a few reputable sources will be trusted, like when there were only a few TV news channels.

[–] schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de 8 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Before the invention of video, humanity didn't have video evidence either and still managed. We are approaching the end of a ~150 year time period in the history of humanity in which video evidence is persuasive.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] wowwoweowza@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago (7 children)

Read classics:

Pride and Prejudice" by Jane Austen, "Moby Dick" by Herman Melville, "The Great Gatsby" by F. Scott Fitzgerald, and "1984" by George Orwell.

Start here. There are thousands.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] CPMSP@midwest.social 8 points 11 months ago
[–] MudMan@fedia.io 8 points 11 months ago

Man, the AI Bros shilling this stuff are really active in 4Chan, apparently.

[–] wanderwisley@lemm.ee 7 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Reading this made my eye twitch.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] StarlightDust@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 11 months ago

That porn had to be trained on real people's bodies who will never see a penny of it. That's laundered revenge porn.

load more comments
view more: next ›