there are a lot of contexts where i'd be pretty bummed to find out most of the content was written by a computer, or feel like i lost something tangible or meaningful because of that change

in the case of linkedin, i lose nothing. before AI the posts all seemed like they were written by weird robots anyway. it actually reassures me that a human didn't write some of the stuff i read, because i pray that no self-aware human would have written that thing into the internet.

> Post Length Has Increased by 107% Since Chat-GPT Launched

Oh, joy.

LinkedIn lists their "highest performing posts".[1] #1 is "Marketers, stop making these 4 measurement mistakes" All ten of them read like they were generated by a program. Not even an LLM, something dumber like a template spam generator.

My own LinkedIn entry says "See my Github." Haven't updated LinkedIn in years. Hadn't looked in months. If anybody wants to talk to me, my email address is available.

[1] https://www.linkedin.com/business/marketing/blog/social-medi...

I have a hard time reading any article with AI generated images these days. Especially of robots. Please no.

There's a literal built-in feature, no one is surprised its AI.

“The release of the popular AI chatbot, ChatGPT at the end of 2022 likely led to a 189% surge in AI usage in LinkedIn posts.”

189%, eh? This stat makes me believe the entire article is made up.

LinkedIn is by far the most useless repository of written drivel in the history of humanity. It's pretty much baked in - all social media is performative, but for LinkedIn it's performative on a site specifically designed to connect people who want to sell their labor for money for people willing to pay.

The only good thing to come out of the the LinkedIn feed was r/LinkedInLunatics.

Hm. I was anticipating AI slob to take over, but this actually has me thinking. If I was to write a long post for LinkedIn (which I would never do), I would probably ask ChatGPT to proofread this. Never actively checked this, but I already have a sort-of mental filter for LinkedIn low-effort posts. For the posts I actually look at, I'm not sure I would mind if ChatGPT had a part in proofreading this. Wonder what the specificity of the AI detector is for detecting AI-written post vis-a-vis AI-edited posts.

This comment is all organic, no AI ingredients :)

And the other half is written by insane people

this claims that over 5% of LinkedIn posts in 2018 (pre GPT-2) were AI-generated

I find that hard to believe

Dead internet theory is coming true

... and 100 percent of long posts on LinkedIn are useless drivel from idiots engaged in clumsy self-promotion. So?

Or the way people talk on LinkedIn isn't sufficiently different than what an AI randomly spews out.

Shitpost in, shitpost out.

100% of Upwork proposals are too, removing any differentiation, and means I’ll probably never use the platform again to find people

I mean if you’re out there reading long posts on LinkedIn, idk what you expect. It’s not like the human written ones were overflowing with knowledge.

...according to this company's AI detector, so not validated or validatable by anyone else.

I feel like we must eventually reach an age where people have to pay (significant money) just to post.

Why are social networks allowing people to just broadcast to massive audiences for free?

I’m curious if content would be more satisfying if only the most motivated people were publishing content and not just spammers spewing AI drivel to grow their brand.