"...to capture information and turn it into knowledge." Could this author literally gargle Altman's balls in their throat any harder?
this post was submitted on 16 Dec 2025
153 points (98.7% liked)
Technology
78183 readers
2107 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Sigh... It's Forbes. It's what they're citing that I find useful and something to chuckle at.
I might make another attempt to read this later but I stopped at that exact spot with an irrepressible urge to call bullshit.
Here's the Cloudflare link they're pulling from in case people want to go straight to the source https://radar.cloudflare.com/year-in-review/2025
Added it to the post.
It was almost certainly written by gpt, you can tell because it doesn't make any sense but still manages to be objectively incorrect.
Information already is knowledge, and that's not what gpt does.
Information is contextualized data. Knowledge is contextualized information. Wisdom is contextualized knowledge.
And tomato does not belong in a fruit salad
Yeah the sentence should really be rewritten as "to capture knowledge already accessible on the internet, and repackage it into an utterly pointless hallucinating RAM guzzling money pit"
Holy shit, that's actually a real quote from the article(!) That's just shameful writing.
Non-human bots now account for 56.5% of internet traffic
Traffic, not content...
But still, we're getting there
Does the article describe human bots?
I wouldn't be surprised if we've already passed that for new content. I can't search for anything nowadays without it being clearly AI written garbage, especially for guides for video games.
At least when someone on GameFAQs made some shit up it was a human being looking to troll you, not some statistical bullshit machine trying to generate page views for ad revenue
.christmas ? Who is in charge of this shit?
If you mean which top level domains exist, that's ICANN. If you mean who administers the .christmas domain specifically, that's Uniregistry (owned by GoDaddy).
without reading the article, I'm guessing it's the cheapest when you buy a domain
...the leading cause of internet outages is government-directed shutdowns?