You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Val comments on Upcoming LW Changes - Less Wrong Discussion

46 Post author: Vaniver 03 February 2016 05:34AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Article Navigation

Comments (105)
Tags: meta

Comments (105)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Lumifer 05 February 2016 03:39:03PM *  2 points [-]

Actually, that could be huge. Rationality blogs generated by bots! Self-improvement blogs generated by bots! Gosh-wow science writing generated by bots!

LOL. Wake up and smell the tea :-) People who want to push advertising into your eyeballs now routinely construct on-demand (as in, in response to a Google query) websites/blogs/etc. just so that you'd look at them and they get paid for ad impressions.

See e.g. recent Yvain:

EHealthMe’s business model is to make an automated program that runs through every single drug and every possible side effect, scrapes the FDA database for examples, then autopublishes an ad-filled web page titled “COULD $DRUG CAUSE $SIDEEFFECT?”. It populates the page by spewing random FDA data all over it, concludes “$SIDEEFFECT is found among people who take $DRUG”, and offers a link to a support group for $DRUG patients suffering from $SIDE_EFFECT. Needless to say, the support group is an automatically-generated forum with no posts in it.

Now, you say you want to turn this to the light side..?

Comment author: Val 05 February 2016 10:01:50PM 1 point [-]

There is an interesting article about how and why people are susceptible to such things.

It is also an interesting experiment in how many times one can include the word "bullshit" into a serious, peer-reviewed article.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit