8 ms·

Then the fight Kagi is proposing is against bad AI content, not AI content per-se? Then that's very subjective...

by laacz 10mo ago

sjs382 10mo ago
I don't pretend to speak for them, but I'm OK in principle dealing in non-absolutes.
Thrymr 10mo ago
Explicitly in the article, one of the headings is "AI slop is deceptive or low-value AI-generated content, created to manipulate ranking or attention rather than help the reader." So yes, they are proposing marking bad AI content (from the user's perspective), not all AI-generated content.
- laacz 10mo ago
  Which troubles me a bit, as 'bad' does not have same definition for everyone.
  - Thrymr 10mo ago
    How is this any different from a search engine choosing how to rank any other content, including penalizing SEO spam? I may not agree with all of their priorities, but I would welcome the search engine filtering out low quality, low effort spam for me.
  - SllX 10mo ago
    There’s a whole genre of websites out there that are a ToC and a series of ChatGPT responses. I take it to mean they’re targeting that shit specifically and anything else that becomes similarly prevalent and a plague upon search results.
  - harimau777 10mo ago
    A simple definition would be: Its bad if it isn't labeled as AI content or if there is not a mechanism that allows you to filter out AI content.
  - sjs382 10mo ago
    That's fine.
  - feedyourhead 10mo ago
    Yes, that's why we'll publish a blog post on this subject in the coming weeks. We've been working on this topic since the beginning of summer, and right now our focus is on exploring report patterns. Matt also shared insights about the other signals we use for this evaluation here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45920720 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45920720 And we are still exploring other factors, 1/ is the reported content ai-generated? 2/ is most content in that domain ai-generated (+ other domain-level signals) ==> we are here 3/ is it unreviewed? (no human accountability, no sources, ...) 4/ is it mindlessly produced? (objective errors, wrong information, poor judgement, ...)

Then the fight Kagi is proposing is against bad AI content, not AI content per-se? Then that's very subjective...

by laacz 10mo ago

Then the fight Kagi is proposing is against bad AI content, not AI content per-se? Then that's very subjective...

sjs382 10mo ago

I don't pretend to speak for them, but I'm OK in principle dealing in non-absolutes.

Thrymr 10mo ago

Explicitly in the article, one of the headings is "AI slop is deceptive or low-value AI-generated content, created to manipulate ranking or attention rather than help the reader." So yes, they are proposing marking bad AI content (from the user's perspective), not all AI-generated content.

laacz 10mo ago
Which troubles me a bit, as 'bad' does not have same definition for everyone.
- Thrymr 10mo ago
  How is this any different from a search engine choosing how to rank any other content, including penalizing SEO spam? I may not agree with all of their priorities, but I would welcome the search engine filtering out low quality, low effort spam for me.
- SllX 10mo ago
  There’s a whole genre of websites out there that are a ToC and a series of ChatGPT responses. I take it to mean they’re targeting that shit specifically and anything else that becomes similarly prevalent and a plague upon search results.
- harimau777 10mo ago
  A simple definition would be: Its bad if it isn't labeled as AI content or if there is not a mechanism that allows you to filter out AI content.
- sjs382 10mo ago
  That's fine.
- feedyourhead 10mo ago
  Yes, that's why we'll publish a blog post on this subject in the coming weeks. We've been working on this topic since the beginning of summer, and right now our focus is on exploring report patterns. Matt also shared insights about the other signals we use for this evaluation here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45920720 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45920720 And we are still exploring other factors, 1/ is the reported content ai-generated? 2/ is most content in that domain ai-generated (+ other domain-level signals) ==> we are here 3/ is it unreviewed? (no human accountability, no sources, ...) 4/ is it mindlessly produced? (objective errors, wrong information, poor judgement, ...)