Ah yes, the „likely Greta Thunberg“ or other people I don’t like antichrist.

It might sound kinda radical, but I feel that we need a culture shift to people paying for things, even if it’s small amounts, if we want to be truly competitive to „big tech“. Big tech uses venture capital to offer free stuff and thereby establish monopolies. We expect developers to work for free. It does work to an extent, but obviously it’s limited. And also people deserve being paid for their work.

Some work could be done in the area of how the funds are managed and presented, so it’s transparent and fair.

I’d be happy to pay for things like Ubuntu Touch to have quickly a viable alternative to Android and iOS. It’s possible to donate, but donations tend to not be reliable or make development viable at all. Paying for Open Source seems fine, as long as fund allocation is fully transparent.

There’s also Volla Phone (with Ubuntu Touch or dual boot Android/Ubuntu Touch).

We need to support Ubuntu Touch. It’s such a promising alternative and it would be a dream to have it at same level and app support as current major platforms.

That’s what „flood the zone“ ultimately means. It’s effectively no different than the other solution usually proposed, which is banning social media. Except than bans can be avoided, people will seek to challenge them, etc.

There are a few competitive devices that even come with Ubuntu Touch preinstalled.

It depends on how you present it. It doesn’t have to be „boring good“. And even then you can still work e.g. on the comment area (reactive, not original content).

It doesn’t have 2 of the biggest corporations in the world funding it. Maybe something can be done at policy level to get it up to speed. With Linux at foundation we already have like 70%.

What if you don’t use it as only measure? You launch 2 things in parallel: 1. neutralization: flood the zone, exhaust everyone, 2. provide a solution: sane channels that make clear how thinking, fact checking and honest dialogue are the only way out.

I think that flooding the zone with alternative slop would have a neutralizing effect. At the end everyone gets exhausted, which is a better outcome than allowing right wing slop to spread completely unhindered. Of course people will then start protecting their spaces, moderating the slop they don’t like, but you‘d at least have neutralized the public spaces, which would be a win.

That would be for people that are trusting the original AI.

It could, among other things, link to sources.

It doesn’t even have to be accurate. It suffices if it makes clear that there are different perspectives, or that you simply can’t trust anything. People exhausted by contradicting slop is a better outcome than allowing only one type of slop to take over.

It felt effortless to me. It might need a bit more polished user interface on web, but other than that it feels like a good, user friendly app. What it needs rather is more visibility.

Oh no what are we going to do… a far right AI-avatar! People know that you can create 10000+ left, center, etc. AI-avatars, as well as fact checking AI-avatars debunking what this one says, right?

You need to calm down. The human brain is a powerful instrument of creativity when you aren’t suffocating it will all that nay-saying.

I just generated a couple of AI images contrasting “smart and balanced” with “emotional and stupid” in about 2 minutes, and I’ll contact people with more reach than me to consider the idea. Since it’s so easy to generate I assume that everyone who likes the idea will just write the prompts themselves. Looking forward to your 2 cents as well.

If you can’t make it appealing and simple, maybe you have some soul searching to do. While execution is usually complex, the basic ideas or sentiments are simple, and thus also suitable for „short attention span“. As an interesting example, the idea of complexity itself you’re describing, can be marketed in a simple way: are you smart or an easy to manipulate dum-dum? Create positive associations with double-checking, an identity around being smart, ridicule the gullible, make them feel genuinely embarrassed. It’s not so difficult.

AI agents to reshape public opinion in a way that threatens to undermine democracy

I‘ve never understood the weird total helplessness of pro-democracy people here, can’t we, and in particular politicians simply flood the zone with pro-democracy contents too? AI, bots and outsourcing are cheap and available to everyone…

Nice