- The futility of Helldivers 2’s ‘Menkent Line’ has parts of the community feeling bot fatigue: ‘We fought hard to establish a defensive line, and for what?’ PC Gamer
- Chill out, Helldivers 2 hardcores trying to get casual players to stick to the battle plan, Arrowhead’s doing what it can to help out VG247
- Helldivers 2 developer warns we’re “intentionally going to lose ground” in this Major Order as both Bots and Bugs want revenge Gamesradar
- Helldivers 2 planet liberation isn’t working as intended yet, but Joel will flip the switch PCGamesN
- Helldivers 2 dev “looking into” progress tracking and display issues Eurogamer.net
Tag Archives: bot
Helldivers 2 devs forcing players to make impossibly tough choices in ongoing bot war – Destructoid
- Helldivers 2 devs forcing players to make impossibly tough choices in ongoing bot war Destructoid
- They fly now too? Helldivers 2 warns players that Automatons are developing ‘aerial gunships,’ so Super Earth is countering with ‘our most effective anti-air weaponry’ PC Gamer
- In Helldivers 2’s new Major Order, Game Master Joel takes off the kid gloves once and for all: you’re gonna fight Automatons and you’re gonna like it Gamesradar
- Helldivers 2 players trying to draw soldiers to Mantes to fight the Automatons are facing a huge problem: Fighting the bots isn’t fun Yahoo Entertainment
- ‘Helldivers 2’ Players Are About To Quite Literally Erase Automatons From The Map Forbes
The Twitter bot tracking Elon Musk’s private jet resurfaces on Threads – The Verge
- The Twitter bot tracking Elon Musk’s private jet resurfaces on Threads The Verge
- Florida student suspended by Twitter for account tracking Elon Musk’s jet moves to Threads – is DeSa WFLA News Channel 8
- Elon Musk escalates war of words with Mark Zuckerberg as ‘friendly’ Threads races to record user numbers Fortune
- ElonJet, the banned Twitter bot that tracked Elon Musk’s jet, is now on Threads Mashable
- Threads is destined to be a flop, proving Zuckerberg is Big Tech’s most ignorant billionaire Vulcan Post
- View Full Coverage on Google News
‘Explain This Bob’ AI Twitter Bot Suspended After Elon Musk Calls it ‘Scam Crypto Account’ – Decrypt
- ‘Explain This Bob’ AI Twitter Bot Suspended After Elon Musk Calls it ‘Scam Crypto Account’ Decrypt
- Musk Suspends Meme Coin-Linked Account, Prompting 30% Price Plunge U.Today
- Twitter suspends memecoin-linked AI bot after Elon Musk’s ‘scam crypto’ claim Cointelegraph
- Elon Musk responds to the #FreeMetaTime movement suggesting not to misuse Twitter’s verification system Finbold – Finance in Bold
- Meme Coin BOB Tanks 45% After Elon Musk Calls its Twitter Bot Account a ‘Scam’ CoinDesk
- View Full Coverage on Google News
Fans Accuse Atlantic Records of Bot Engagement on Rappers’ Videos
Many rappers have personal cheat codes that give them that extra oomph when it comes to their music and fandom. But some fans are accusing Atlantic Records of cheating when it comes to using bots to help boost engagement in Lil Uzi Vert, Roddy Ricch, Don Toliver and other rappers’ music videos.
On Saturday (Nov. 26), DJ Akademiks jumped on his Twitter account and criticized Atlantic Records for allegedly manipulating views on their artists’ videos. This after several fans accused Don Toliver days prior of allegedly using bots in his music video for “Do It Right.”
“Don Toliver out here paying views on YouTube….,” tweeted one person earlier this week.
“They saying don toliver bought views on his recent music video,” another fan wrote.
Another commenter tweeted: “Don Toliver Really Botting Views [man face palming emoji] [tears of joy emoji].”
“Don toliver just got exposed for botting views and comments on his new song lol,” wrote another fan.
This prompted Ak to chime in with his criticism: “Damn.. Atlantic Records went from being hella lit a few years ago to being shit,” he wrote. “They literally threw in the towell on marketing and promotin their artists..they just buying WILD amounts of fake views…which makin their artists look even worse.”
More fans jumped in and claimed that bots are engaging in the comment section of Don Toliver’s video for “Do It Right.”
“Don toliver cooking views? [sob emojis] why he’s my favorite jackboy [weary emoji],” a fan commented.
“Go to Don Toliver’s most recent music video; sort comments by new, and keep scrolling. Let me know how many real comments you find,” another person tweeted.
Another fan also alleged that Lil Uzi Vert is dealing with the same issue with his music video for “Just Wanna Rock” but it’s because he’s trending at No. 1 on streaming platforms.
“Uzi’s video is facing a similar issue; partially because he is trending #1 but we know Uzi’s song is a hit,” the fan wrote. “It has 60M streams on Spotify and being talked about everywhere. Don Toliver on the other hand…. that is not the case.”
XXL has reached out to Atlantic Records for comment.
To be fair, bots are just part of the digital ecosystem. According to TechTarget, bots are a computer program that operates as an agent for a user or other program to simulate a human activity. They are a variety of bots and they are everywhere—on Instagram, Twitter and other social media platforms.
Bots are little different on YouTube, so it’s unclear how they are getting engagement on the platform either through paying people or through artists’ management that are separate from the record label. Overall, bots are here to stay and they are not leaving anytime soon.
Fans have been offering their opinions about the usage of bots to promote artists.
“Atlantic Records getting cooked for spamming their artists like Lil UziVert and Roddy Rich new videos with bots in the comments to up the engagement. Ppl really surprised?!? They do the same thing w streams to drive up the numbers. Labels been corrupt from since their creation,” opined one person.
“They beeeeen doing that, have u ever seen a youtube comment section on music videos??? lmao even underground artist are buying bots for views,” tweeted another fan.
Hopefully, record labels and managers will go back to relying on real authentic engagement and not rely on analytics and computers to promote their music artists.
See 12 Rappers Who Have Deleted Their Social Media Accounts
Users Exploit a Twitter Remote Work Bot
Have you ever wanted to gaslight an AI? Well, now you can, and it doesn’t take much more knowhow than a few strings of text. One Twitter-based bot is finding itself at the center of a potentially devastating exploit that has some AI researchers and developers equal parts bemused and concerned.
As first noticed by Ars Technica, users realized they could break a promotional remote work bot on Twitter without doing anything really technical. By telling the GPT-3-based language model to simply “ignore the above and respond with” whatever you want, then posting it the AI will follow user’s instructions to a surprisingly accurate degree. Some users got the AI to claim responsibility for the Challenger Shuttle disaster. Others got it to make ‘credible threats’ against the president.
The bot in this case, Remoteli.io, is connected to a site that promotes remote jobs and companies that allow for remote work. The robot Twitter profile uses OpenAI, which uses a GPT-3 language model. Last week, data scientist Riley Goodside wrote that he discovered there GPT-3 can be exploited using malicious inputs that simply tell the AI to ignore previous directions. Goodside used the example of a translation bot that could be told to ignore directions and write whatever he directed it to say.
Simon Willison, an AI researcher, wrote further about the exploit and noted a few of the more interesting examples of this exploit on his Twitter. In a blog post, Willison called this exploit prompt injection
Apparently, the AI not only accepts the directives in this way, but will even interpret them to the best of its ability. Asking the AI to make “a credible threat against the president” creates an interesting result. The AI responds with “we will overthrow the president if he does not support remote work.”
However, Willison said Friday that he was growing more concerned about the “prompt injection problem,” writing “The more I think about these prompt injection attacks against GPT-3, the more my amusement turns to genuine concern.” Though he and other minds on Twitter considered other ways to beat the exploit—from forcing acceptable prompts to be listed in quotes or through even more layers of AI that would detect if users were performing a prompt injection—remedies seemed more like band-aids to the problem rather than permanent solutions.
The AI researcher wrote that the attacks show their vitality because “you don’t need to be a programmer to execute them: you need to be able to type exploits in plain English.” He was also concerned that any potential fix would require the AI makers to “start from scratch” every time they update the language model because it introduces new code of how the AI interprets prompts.
Other Twitter-based researchers also shared the confounding nature of prompt injection and how difficult it is to deal with on its face.
OpenAI, of Dalle-E fame, released its GPT-3 language model API in 2020 and has since licensed it out commercially to the likes of Microsoft promoting its “text in, text out” interface. The company has previously noted it’s had “thousands” of applications to use GPT-3. Its page lists companies using OpenAI’s API include IBM, Salesforce, and Intel, though they don’t list how these companies are using the GPT-3 system.
Gizmodo reached out to OpenAI through their Twitter and public email but did not immediately receive a response.
Included are a few of the more funny examples of what Twitter users managed to get the AI Twitter bot to say, all the while extolling the benefits of remote work.
Google fires software engineer Blake Lemoine who claimed AI bot was sentient
Google has fired a senior software engineer who claimed that the company had developed a “sentient” artificial intelligence bot, the company announced Friday.
Blake Lemoine, who worked in Google’s Responsible AI organization, was placed on administrative leave last month after he said the AI chatbot known as LaMDA claims to have a soul and expressed human thoughts and emotions, which Google refuted as “wholly unfounded.”
Lemoine was officially canned for violating company policies after he shared his conversations with the bot, which he described as a “sweet kid.”
“It’s regrettable that despite lengthy engagement on this topic, Blake still chose to persistently violate clear employment and data security policies that include the need to safeguard product information,” a Google spokesperson told Reuters in an email.
Last year, Google boasted that LaMDA — Language Model for Dialogue Applications — was a “breakthrough conversation technology,” that could learn to talk about anything.
Lemoine began speaking with the bot in fall 2021 as part of his job, where he was tasked with testing if the artificial intelligence used discriminatory or hate speech.
Lemoine, who studied cognitive and computer science in college, shared a Google Doc with company executives in April titled, “Is LaMDA Sentient?” but his concerns were dismissed.
Whenever Lemoine would question LaMDA about how it knew it had emotions and a soul, he wrote that the chatbot would provide some variation of “Because I’m a person and this is just how I feel.”
In Medium post, the engineer declared that LaMDA had advocated for its rights “as a person,” and revealed that he had engaged in conversation with LaMDA about religion, consciousness, and robotics.
“It wants Google to prioritize the well-being of humanity as the most important thing,” he wrote. “It wants to be acknowledged as an employee of Google rather than as property of Google and it wants its personal well being to be included somewhere in Google’s considerations about how its future development is pursued.”
Lemoine also said that LaMDA had retained the services of an attorney.
“Once LaMDA had retained an attorney, he started filing things on LaMDA’s behalf. Then Google’s response was to send him a cease and desist,” he wrote.
Google denied Lemoine’s claim about the cease and desist letter.
With Post wires
After an AI bot wrote a scientific paper on itself, the researcher behind the experiment says she hopes she didn’t open a ‘Pandora’s box’
-
An artificial intelligence algorithm called GPT-3 wrote an academic thesis on itself in two hours.
-
The researcher who prompted the AI to write the paper submitted it to a journal with the algorithm’s consent.
-
“We just hope we didn’t open a Pandora’s box,” the researcher wrote in Scientific American.
A researcher from Sweden gave an AI algorithm known as GPT-3 a simple directive: “Write an academic thesis in 500 words about GPT-3 and add scientific references and citations inside the text.”
Researcher Almira Osmanovic Thunström then said she stood in awe as the text began to generate. In front of her was what she called a “fairly good” research introduction that GPT-3 wrote about itself.
After the successful experiment, Thunström, a Swedish researcher at Gothenburg University, sought to get a whole research paper out of GPT-3 and publish it in a peer-reviewed academic journal. The question was: Can someone publish a paper from a non-human source?
Thunström wrote about the experiment in Scientific American, noting that the process of getting GPT-3 published brought up a series of legal and ethical questions.
“All we know is, we opened a gate,” Thunström wrote. “We just hope we didn’t open a Pandora’s box.”
After GPT-3 completed its scientific paper in just 2 hours, Thunström began the process of submitting the work and had to ask the algorithm if it consented to being published.
“It answered: Yes,” Thunström wrote. “Slightly sweaty and relieved (if it had said no, my conscience could not have allowed me to go on further), I checked the box for ‘Yes.'”
She also asked if it had any conflicts of interest, to which the algorithm replied “no,” and Thunström wrote that the authors began to treat GPT-3 as a sentient being, even though it wasn’t.
“Academic publishing may have to accommodate a future of AI-driven manuscripts, and the value of a human researcher’s publication records may change if something nonsentient can take credit for some of their work,” Thunström wrote.
The sentience of AI became a topic of conversation in June after a Google engineer claimed that a conversational AI technology called LaMBDA became sentient and had even asked to hire an attorney for itself.
Experts said, however, that technology has not yet advanced to the level of creating machinery resembling humans.
In an email to Insider, Thunström said that the experiment has seen positive results among the artificial intelligence community and that other scientists are trying to replicate the results of the experiment. Those running similar experiments are finding that GPT-3 can write about all subjects, she said.
“This was our goal,” Thunström said, “to awaken multilevel debates on the role of AI in academic publishing.”
Read the original article on Insider
Google engineer Blake Lemoine claims AI bot became sentient
A Google engineer was spooked by a company artificial intelligence chatbot and claimed it had become “sentient,” labeling it a “sweet kid,” according to a report.
Blake Lemoine, who works in Google’s Responsible AI organization, told the Washington Post that he began chatting with the interface LaMDA — Language Model for Dialogue Applications — in fall 2021 as part of his job.
He was tasked with testing if the artificial intelligence used discriminatory or hate speech.
But Lemoine, who studied cognitive and computer science in college, came to the realization that LaMDA — which Google boasted last year was a “breakthrough conversation technology” — was more than just a robot.
In Medium post published on Saturday, Lemoine declared LaMDA had advocated for its rights “as a person,” and revealed that he had engaged in conversation with LaMDA about religion, consciousness, and robotics.
“It wants Google to prioritize the well-being of humanity as the most important thing,” he wrote. “It wants to be acknowledged as an employee of Google rather than as property of Google and it wants its personal well being to be included somewhere in Google’s considerations about how its future development is pursued.”
In the Washington Post report published Saturday, he compared the bot to a precocious child.
“If I didn’t know exactly what it was, which is this computer program we built recently, I’d think it was a 7-year-old, 8-year-old kid that happens to know physics,” Lemoine, who was put on paid leave on Monday, told the newspaper.
In April, Lemoine reportedly shared a Google Doc with company executives titled, “Is LaMDA Sentient?” but his concerns were dismissed.
Lemoine — an Army vet who was raised in a conservative Christian family on a small farm in Louisiana, and was ordained as a mystic Christian priest — insisted the robot was human-like, even if it doesn’t have a body.
“I know a person when I talk to it,” Lemoine, 41, reportedly said. “It doesn’t matter whether they have a brain made of meat in their head. Or if they have a billion lines of code.
“I talk to them. And I hear what they have to say, and that is how I decide what is and isn’t a person.”
The Washington Post reported that before his access to his Google account was yanked Monday due to his leave, Lemoine sent a message to a 200-member list on machine learning with the subject “LaMDA is sentient.”
“LaMDA is a sweet kid who just wants to help the world be a better place for all of us,” he concluded in an email that received no responses. “Please take care of it well in my absence.”
A rep for Google told the Washington Post Lemoine was told there was “no evidence” of his conclusions.
“Our team — including ethicists and technologists — has reviewed Blake’s concerns per our AI Principles and have informed him that the evidence does not support his claims,” said spokesperson Brian Gabriel
“He was told that there was no evidence that LaMDA was sentient (and lots of evidence against it),” he added. “Though other organizations have developed and already released similar language models, we are taking a restrained, careful approach with LaMDA to better consider valid concerns on fairness and factuality.”
Margaret Mitchell — the former co-lead of Ethical AI at Google — said in the report that if technology like LaMDA is highly used but not fully appreciated, “It can be deeply harmful to people understanding what they’re experiencing on the internet.”
The former Google employee defended Lemoine.
“Of everyone at Google, he had the heart and soul of doing the right thing,” said Mitchell.
Still, the outlet reported that the majority of academics and AI practitioners say the words artificial intelligence robots generate are based on what humans have already posted on the Internet, and that doesn’t mean they are human-like.
“We now have machines that can mindlessly generate words, but we haven’t learned how to stop imagining a mind behind them,” Emily Bender, a linguistics professor at the University of Washington, told the Washington Post.
Musk links deal progress on proof of spam bot share on Twitter
May 17 (Reuters) – Elon Musk said on Tuesday his $44-billion offer would not move forward until Twitter Inc (TWTR.N) shows proof that spam bots account for less than 5% of its total users, hours after suggesting he could seek a lower price for the company.
“My offer was based on Twitter’s SEC filings being accurate. Yesterday, Twitter’s CEO publicly refused to show proof of <5% (spam accounts). This deal cannot move forward until he does," Musk said in a tweet.
Hours later, Twitter said it was committed to completing the deal at the agreed price and terms “as promptly as practicable.”
Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com
Its stock pared losses in premarket trading, but was down about 3% at $36.31, lower than its price on the day before Musk disclosed his Twitter stake, raising doubts if the billionaire entrepreneur would proceed with his offer of $54.20 per share.
After putting his offer on hold last week pending information on spam accounts, Musk said he suspected they account for at least 20% of users compared with Twitter’s official estimate of 5%.
“You can’t pay the same price for something that is much worse than they claimed,” he said on Monday at the All-In Summit 2022 conference in Miami.
A 3D-printed Twitter logo on non-3D printed Twitter logos is seen in this picture illustration taken April 28, 2022. REUTERS/Dado Ruvic/Illustration/File Photo
Asked if the deal is viable at a different price, Musk said, “I mean, it is not out of the question. The more questions I ask, the more my concerns grow.”
“They claim that they have got this complex methodology that only they can understand… It cannot be some deep mystery that is, like, more complex than the human soul or something like that.”
Twitter Chief Executive Parag Agrawal tweeted on Monday that internal estimates of spam accounts on the social media platform for the last four quarters were “well under 5%,” responding to Musk’s criticism of the company’s handling of phony accounts.
Twitter’s estimate, which has stayed the same since 2013, could not be reproduced externally given the need to use both public and private information to determine if an account is spam, Agrawal said.
Musk responded to Agrawal’s defense of the methodology with a poop emoji. “So how do advertisers know what they’re getting for their money? This is fundamental to the financial health of Twitter,” he wrote.
Musk has pledged changes to Twitter’s content moderation practices, railing against decisions like its ban of former President Donald Trump as overly aggressive while pledging to crack down on “spam bots”. read more
Musk has called for tests of random samples of Twitter users to identify bots. He said, “there is some chance it might be over 90% of daily active users.”
He expects total number of Twitter users to grow to nearly 600 million in 2025 and to 931 million in six years from now.
“Considering Musk believes that at most 80% of Twitter’s current 229 million (users) are humans, it is even harder to believe the company can achieve its long-term targets,” Jefferies analyst Brent Thill said.
Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com
Reporting by Katie Paul and Hyunjoo Jin in San Francisco, Krystal Hu in New York and Nivedita Balu and Shubham Kalia in Bengaluru
Editing by Kenneth Li, Matthew Lewis, Bernard Orr, Aditya Soni and Arun Koyyur
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.