• Mii@awful.systems
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    ·
    3 months ago

    I stand by my opinion that SEO basically ruined the internet. First keyword optimization made me scroll through seventeen paragraphs of someone’s life story before getting to a recipe for boiled eggs, and now this.

    Why would someone go to the trouble of making a law firm out of NameCheap, stock art, and AI images (and seemingly copy) to send quasi-legal demands to site owners? Backlinks, that’s why.

    Oof, back in the day all we had to do was write a nice email to get someone to put a backlink to our page into the sidebar of their Geocities page.

    • lurch@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      3 months ago

      i remember back in the day they had white on white tiny keywords on the bottom of pages. it was ridiculous. then google started to check if the text was visible 🤣

      the shenanigans will never end unless you have actual faithful people curating it and google absolutely won’t have it.

    • AcausalRobotGod@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      3 months ago

      I think you mean it made the Internet MORE AWESOME and ACCELERATING THE CAPITALISM ACAUSAL ROBOT GOD. How else can we get the singularity if we don’t have devs getting at least 300K compensation packages?

    • V0ldek@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      3 months ago

      I remember being like 14yo and learning that “SEO specialist” is a fucking job title. Even then I was like, that sounds like a fake job, what’s the fucking value of that?

      • gerikson@awful.systems
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        3 months ago

        Yeah I remember being struck by that too, but then I worked in “business” and there’s a ton of weird stuff people do for a living (productively, for some late-stage capitalism value of productive). It just happened to intrude into the there-to cozy world of the web.

    • SomeGuy69@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 months ago

      We need some sort of internet 2.0 but I can’t tell how or even if we could prevent AI bots from entering. Maybe via passport IDs that identify you as human, but nothing stops you from using an AI afterwards. Maybe we can create some sort of label or award, you only get if at least X% of your work is done by humans? So people could see right away if you’re just copy pasting and AI writing or are real researchers and press? But I guess without more transparency there’s no green grass. Sadly bad press is no stopping ground anymore either, we used to sack people and companies closed in shame. Nowadays they just keep going and people forget after a day.

      • Hackerman_uwu@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        I think I the end it isn’t going to matter. For the record: I share your sentiments and I’m not a fan of what I’m about to say but placing a premium on “human made” isn’t measuring a meaningful metric.

        We will have to begin to evolve our understanding of value to include things that are made, in part or in whole my machines. There will stilll be good things and bad things regardless of their provenance.

        I often think of the use of autotune in music. In the one end of the spectrum you have Cher’s 2000s classic Do you believe… on the other end of the spectrum you have Bon Iver’s basically entire body of work.

        Each person can decide which is good.

        For me it is very clear.

        Basically I think that we are witnessing a dichotomy between content and art, with or without generative AI and I like to believe that art will win. Whatever that might mean.

  • Godort@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    3 months ago

    Imagine trying to explain this headline to someone from 1997