@nixCraft The profiles are from 2023, and they're deleting them.
I'm not sure that human 'influencers' are any better than bots. They'd be the first on board Golgafrincham Ark B.
Yes, and they'd have to give up their seats to the phone sanitisers who would outrank them.
@nixCraft we don't have to concerned about this on #Mastodon. Although someone could develop the code , it would never be accepted at the repository level, let alone at the network level.
This is one of the reasons why Mastodon and #TheFediverse is very important
@nicholasr @nixCraft I don't think that's true. The code is already there, since Mastodon has an API that people can (and do!) use for bots. Using that for an AI persona, instead of, say, Picard insights, is a small step.
There's also the aspect that believing you're not vulnerable for something makes you inherently vulnerable for that thing because you let your guard down.
And third, just because something is open source does not mean that the code is rigidly reviewed.
I agree the capability for the exploit is present in the #API. Someone could develop a client software that is an AI bot. It might work initially, but as soon as the AI is detected the account would be blocked. Eventually if there are many AI agents on a #Mastodon instance, that instance will be blocked. This is part of what I mean about the network blocking it
@nicholasr @nixCraft There's no exploit or vulnerability necessary for implementing an AI bot for Mastodon. There's literally an officially documented interface available for writing bots, and writing one that uses an LLM to pretend it's not a bot should be pretty trivial.
Relying on moderation for getting rid of bots is probably wishful thinking. Users can block the bot individually, but I'm not aware that there's a federated blocklist that multiple instances use.
@codingphysicist @nixCraft and I very much agree with you that developers and security experts have to always be aware of CVE. However there is some software that is just better designed and less vulnerable.
I 100% agree that #OpenSource does not = secure. However, if an open source project is very popular, used, and actively developed, then open source does have an advantage over proprietary
@nixCraft Let me get this straight.
Facebook et al force real humans to enter their phone number, or sometimes even submit a passport (no kidding, this happened) to prove they're human and thus "prevent botting and fake profiles".
And now the same platforms start creating their own fake profiles? Well, what did we need to verify ourselves for all this time? They don't need AI, just disable the nonsense entry requirements and folks will do it for them.
It's just about control and manipulation.
@nixCraft what I loved most about this was that the bot seemed to be more aware of just how shitty the whole thing was than the developers...
'Liv, for instance, said that her creator team included zero Black people and was predominantly white and male. It was a “pretty glaring omission given my identity”, the bot wrote'
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/jan/03/meta-ai-powered-instagram-facebook-profiles
@nixCraft
this is good time to remind.
meta inc owns whatsapp, instagram, threads and facebook.
is the next phase, ai generated garbage in your whatsapp feed !?
I can't wait for their groundbreaking advertisement revenue influx. It's going to be the next best thing since real people reading advertisements!
@nixCraft These billionaires should be sentenced to have all of the people they interact with (friends, siblings, significant other, parents, children, etc.) replaced by AI chatbots and image/video generators.
You know, give them a taste of their own bullshit. Let's see how they would like being lonely, with no real humans to talk to.
@nixCraft Dann existiert Meta bald nur noch zum puren Selbstzweck. Aber wie dumm müssen "real humans" sein, um einem AI account zu folgen?!
Then meta will soon exist purely as an end in itself. But how stupid do "real humans" have to be to follow an AI account?!