[0xfffafaCrash]

> There’s already more human produced content in the world than anyone could ever hope to consume, we don’t need more from AI.

Even if you think the harms of AI/machine generated content outweigh the good, this is not a winning argument.

People don’t just consume arbitrary content for the sake of consuming any existing content. That’s rarely the point of it. People look for all kinds of things that don’t exist yet — quite a lot of it referring to things that are only now known or relevant in the given moment or to the given niche audience requesting it. Much of it could likely never exist if it weren’t possible to produce it on demand and which would not be valuable if you had to wait for a human to make it.

[lynx97]

Just happened to me yesterday. I realized I'd really like to watch a long-form video on Huygens Clock. Something between a short (god damnit) and Quicksilver. Thought there must be something detailed. Nope, at least Youtube let me down. Or the search algo, who knows. Since they removed the "20+ minutes" button it has become basically useless to search on YT.

[troupo]

> Since they removed the "20+ minutes" button it has become basically useless to search on YT.

A few days ago I definitely got into an A/B test where the search results were:

- 5 shorts one under another

- new section with one or two videos and one or two shorts

- new section with five or more shorts in a horizontal layout

- new section with videos of which 20-30% were shorts

It's insane

[timedrun]

The generated content is wasting the time of maintainers. How would you solve that?

For your winning argument, what would you use to prevent slop filling up your feed when there is more AI generated content, any sort of protocol that you have?