Google Promotes Fake Articles (LLM Slop) Instead of Originals, Relaying Microsoft's Linux FUD Emanating From Microsoft LLMs
Microsoft "open" "hey hi" interjecting its bias into the Web (and into Google News)
There is strong, still-growing, overwhelming consensus that LLMs are bad and they (or their output) need to be avoided. Cementing this consensus is critical.
This morning in Slopwatch we mentioned Google News promoting LLM slop, taking particular note (evidence also) of the sister slopfarm of gbhackers.com. It has just spewed out this FUD from a known slopfarm. Can nobody in the "Google empire" figure out this site is a slopfarm? After laying off many people who worked Google News one wonders if Google lets "hey hi" manage this whole operation (i.e. automation but no intelligence).
Fake 'article'. Same as this one (piggybacking the original [1]) which was spewed out a short while ago:
The image is slop, the text is slop, everything is slop. Shame on Google for participating in the slopfest. As Baldur Bjarnason put it this week [2,3]: "We have monopolies or oligopolies who control much of the software market and, of particular concern to the web sector, they control how people discover websites."
They even promote slopfarms and shoddy LLM spew (named "Gemini", nothing to do with Gemini Protocol). That's in their own financial interest. █
______
(Debian-based) Tails Site and More (Baldur Bjarnason)
-
New Release: Tails 6.14.2
This release is an emergency release to fix security vulnerabilities in the Linux kernel and the implementation of the Perl programming language.
For more details, read our changelog.
-
We're in for a rough ride as an industry
There’s the not so small issue of the tech industry being quite invested in turning the US into an authoritarian dictatorship and seemingly succeeding. But even if you assume that the US will come out of this in four years’ time as a recovering democracy (an extremely unsafe assumption, I think), the web is likely to suffer as an industry either way.
We have monopolies or oligopolies who control much of the software market and, of particular concern to the web sector, they control how people discover websites.
-
An aside on proposed anti-trust remedies against Google
The Democrats love to build or reinforce the mechanisms of authoritarianism, which they mistakenly think they can apply for good and moral purposes, but then become major building blocks for an authoritarian state.
If the dominance of Chrome is a problem, then that won’t be solved by shifting it over to an equally large competitor. That solution only makes sense if your goal is to maintain the current oligopoly dynamic and that the biggest threat from Google isn’t their threat to the free market – none of these people seem to care about the actual economy – but Google’s size making them harder to control. They want to make Google more controllable, which is already problematic for a democracy, but a controllable Google is an outright gift to the rising fascists.