[RajT88]

I agree with most of this, but complaining about Yoleendadong is some "Old man yells at cloud" stuff.

My wife is a big fan, as she has a lot of funny content specific to Asian cultures. Yes, she has some relationship stuff too. You may not like her content, but she's got a few hundred thousand subscribers on Youtube, and 17 million on TikTok.

[dangus]

I was about to point out two things:

1. This bit you just pointed out. Facebook suggesting Yoleendadong, that’s not weird, she’s wildly popular. Her inclusion in this piece discredits OP as someone who basically has no idea how social media works - which makes the article less insightful, like asking David Attenborough to work the play by play commentary of an NBA game.

2. I don’t think OP realizes how much he should not be admitting that this is what his feed looks like.

Facebook/Instagram pretty much show you exactly what you want to see. I deleted my Meta accounts about 6 months ago but when I used it regularly before that I never saw thirst slop like this.

I had a beautiful algorithm, a mix of mostly hilarious brain rot and actual high effort content involving my interests.

OP is basically accidentally admitting that he’s browsing this kind of stuff in a browser with set Facebook cookies. That’s why you can’t use Meta products without Facebook container.

OP is seeing AI titties because other websites that utilize Facebook’s analytics/marketing products are seeing OP search for AI titties.

Finally, it is very easy to guide Meta algorithms into showing you other stuff if you are seeing things you don’t like. It even has a button for you to tell it what you don’t like.

[RajT88]

> thirst slop like this.

Buddy, I wish the thirst slop on Facebook was like this.

I told my wife quite openly how I went through a 6 week period where I just couldn't get rid of AI generated booby photos of Salma Hayek. Why her? Who knows? I tried everything. Eventually it fixed itself.

Occasionally, FB ads churn up straight up porn which is pretending to be something else. I'm not talking about OF girls - I actually think comparatively they are pretty noble - they pay for ads, and don't bullshit you what it's about. A lot of them are less risque than the people pushing their Insta or whatever.

[taysix]

Agreed, author missed the mark on that one! But makes sense if you haven't seen her content before. Definitely wouldn't call her content "slop".

[kube-system]

This is actually the scariest part of the article for me.

It's clear we've got to the point where at a glance it is hard for those who are otherwise unaware to tell the difference between AI slop and organic content.

If nerds on HN can't tell the difference between an AI slop influencer and a fairly well-regarded human influencer... how can we expect the rest of the public to tell the difference when it comes to science, health, civics, politics, etc???

We're at the cusp of a distrust and misinformation cliff that is going to be terrifying in magnitude.

[hobom]

The article didn't suggest that the video mentioned was AI slop, it correctly recognised it as human generated.

[thot_experiment]

Yeah, she's great. I don't know if I would say she's not slop, but it's the sort of slop that serves as a foundational block of the lexicon of memes I use to communicate with my friends. I don't think this is new, imagemacros/memes are also slop. Maybe I'm using the word wrong?

I guess to me it's kind of synonymous with "content" [mildly derogatory] as to differentiate it from effortposting. She primarily makes content, it's not always art but it doesn't have to be.