[ourlordcaffeine]

>If they don't employ writers, then who is going to be writing the magazine?

Well there is always chatGPT

[elektrontamer]

That's what I really fear about LLMs, good content is going to get drowned out by endless bot drivel.

[pmoriarty]

> That's what I really fear about LLMs, good content is going to get drowned out by endless bot drivel.

I anticipate the opposite.

Already AI content is better than crappy human writers.

In the medium term AI content is going to be better than most human writers (it arguably already is in some limited cases).

In the long term it may compete with the best human writers.

Some humans are too full of themselves, thinking they're so exceptional, while computers are proving time and again that's not so. The evidence is starting us in the face.

[jvm___]

I keep re-reading and referencing this article as it lays out how the human vs AI internet landscape is likely to shake out.

https://maggieappleton.com/ai-dark-forest

[another2another]

The other possible scenario is that people who want to create new content will quickly figure out that the LLMs are basically rewriting their original research and extracting all monetary worth from it, and so stop publishing in any medium that the bots can harvest the information.

So all new discoveries will get walled off from the GPTs and we will be stuck with constantly regurgitated old information unless you go looking in paid for publications.

[intothemild]

I think this wont be sustainable, like, how long til until people stop reading LLM generated content?