Originality.AI looked at 8,885 long Facebook posts made over the past six years.
Key Findings
- 41.18% of current Facebook long-form posts are Likely AI, as of November 2024.
- Between 2023 and November 2024, the average percentage of monthly AI posts on Facebook was 24.05%.
- This reflects a 4.3x increase in monthly AI Facebook content since the launch of ChatGPT. In comparison, the monthly average was 5.34% from 2018 to 2022.
That’s an extremely low sample size for this
8,855 long-form Facebook posts from various users using a 3rd party. The dataset spans from 2018 to November 2024, with a minimum of 100 posts per month, each containing at least 100 words.
seems like thats a good baseline rule and that was about the total number that matched it
With apparently 3 billion active users
Only summing up 9k posts over a 6 year stretch with over 100 words feels like an outreach problem. Conclusion could be drawn that bots have better reach
each post has to be 100 words with at least 100 posts a month
how many actual users do that?
I have no idea because I don’t use the site
But to say less than 0.0001% just seems hard to believe
I don’t use the site either but 100 words is a lot for a facebook post
If you want to visit your old friends in the dying mall. Go to feeds then friends. Should filter everything else out.
You know what they say about Al…
Anyone on Facebook deserves to be shit on by sloppy. They also deserve scanned out of all of the money and anything else.
If you’re on Facebook, you deserve this. Get the hell off Facebook.
Have you ever successfully berated a stranger into doing what you wanted them to do?
Dude, I sort of agree, but Facebook has wedged itself into every facet of society. I keep a Facebook account for 2 things: The pictures my kids’ daycare/school posts because their school app sucks ass, and getting announcements from my city for events and/or emergency notices like boil orders or something. It’s not as simple as just walking away for large swathes of people without losing important community functionality. More and more people absolutely hate Meta and barely anyone I know actually uses Facebook for anything other than what I mentioned above. But until governments, schools, companies, etc. get the fuck off of it to a better alternative, it’s not going anywhere.
You’ve made an excellent case and argument for both ditching all traditional, social media, but also that they are all intrinsically shitty and evil.
If you can’t bring yourself to break away from techno fascism, why should I have any pity for you?
I am not responsible for your apathy nor your weakness. When you gargle the balls of fascism, don’t be surprised when others come and point out how shitty that is.
Dude, chill out.
Edit: itt: brain, dead, and fascist apologist Facebook Earth, who just refuse to accept that their platform is one of the biggest advent of Nazi fascism in this country, and they are all 100% complicit.
This is some Facebook quality content you’re bringing to us here. It’s so great seeing this kind of posts on my feed first thing in the morning. Shows that it’s not just AI poisoning our social media platforms.
While I agree with your message at a high level (I quit FB several years ago), I don’t think it’s productive to be so abrasive.
It’s generally better to be respectful and convincing if you want to change minds.
I’ve posted a notice to leave next week. I need to scrape my photos off, get any remaining contacts, and turn off any integrations. I was only there to connect with family. I can email or text.
FB is a dead husk fake feeding some rich assholes. If it’s coin flip AI, what’s the point?
Back when I got off in 2019, there was a tool (Facebook sponsored somewhere in the settings) that allowed you to save everything in an offline HTML file that you could host locally and get access to things like picture albums, complete with descriptions and comments. Not sure if it still exists, but it made the process incredibly painless getting off while still retaining things like pictures.
It still existed when I did the same thing a year ago or so. They implemented it awhile back to try and avoid antitrust lawsuits around the world. Though, now that Zuckerberg has formally started sucking this regime’s dick, I wouldn’t be surprised if it goes away.
Thank you real internet person. You make the internet great.
- From Another Real Internet Person
Wait, you’re not a dog using the internet while the humans are at work?
It’s incredible, for months now I see some suggested groups, with an AI generated picture of a pet/animal, and the text is always “Great photography”. I block them, but still see new groups every day with things like this, incredible…
I have a hard time understanding facebook’s end game plan here - if they just have a bunch of AI readers reading AI posts, how do they monetize that? Why on earth is the stock market so bullish on them?
AI can put together all that personal data and create very detailed profiles on everyone, automatically. From that data, an Ai can add a bunch of attributes that are very likely to be true as well, based on what the person is doing every day, working, education, gender, social life, mobile data location, bills etc etc.
This is like having a person follow every user around 24 hours per day, combined with a psychologist to interpret and predict the future.
It’s worth a lot of money to advertisers of course.
As long as they can convince advertisers that the enough of the activity is real or enough of the manipulation of public opinion via bots is in facebook’s interest, bots aren’t a problem at all in the short-term.
surely at some point advertisers will put 2 and 2 together when they stop seeing results from targeted advertising.
I think you give them too much credit. As long as it doesn’t actively hurt their numbers, like x, it’s just part of the budget.
They want dumb users consuming ai content, they need LLM content because the remaining users are too stupid to generate the free content that people actually want to click.
Then they pump ads to you based on increasingly targeted AI slop selling more slop.
Engagement.
It’s all they measure, what makes people reply to and react to posts.
People in general are stupid and can’t see or don’t care if something is AI generated
they measure engagement, but they sell human eyeballs for ads.
Engagement is eyeballs looking at ads
… unless it’s AI masquerading as eyeballs looking at ads.
But if half of the engagement is from AI, isnt that a grift on advertisers? Why should I pay for an ad on Facebook that is going to be “seen” by AI agents? AI don’t buy products (yet?)
yes, exactly.
For me it’s some kind of cartoon with the caption “Great comic funny 🤣” and sometimes “funny short film” (even though it’s a picture)
Like, Meta has to know this is happening. Do they really think this is what will keep their userbase? And nobody would think it’s just a little weird?
Well, maybe it is the taste of people still being there… I mean, you have to be at least a little bit strange, if you are still on facebook…
The bigger problem is AI “ignorance,” and it’s not just Facebook. I’ve reported more than one Lemmy post the user naively sourced from ChatGPT or Gemini and took as fact.
No one understands how LLMs work, not even on a basic level. Can’t blame them, seeing how they’re shoved down everyone’s throats as opaque products, or straight up social experiments like Facebook.
…Are we all screwed? Is the future a trippy information wasteland? All this seems to be getting worse and worse, and everyone in charge is pouring gasoline on it.
*where you think they sourced from AI
you have no proof other than seeing ghosts everywhere.
Not get me wrong, fact checking posts is important, but you have no evidence if it is AI, human brain fart or targeted disinformations 🤷🏻♀️
No I mean they literally label the post as “Gemini said this”
I see family do it too, type something into Gemini and just assume it looked it up or something.
I see no problem if the poster gives the info, that the source is AI. This automatically devalues the content of the post/comment and should trigger the reaction that this information is to be taken with a grain of salt and it needs to factchecked in order to improve likelihood that that what was written is fact.
An AI output is most of the time a good indicator about what the truth is, and can give new talking points to a discussion. But it is of course not a “killer-argument”.
The context is bad though.
The post I’m referencing is removed, but there was a tiny “from gemini” footnote in the bottom that most upvoters clearly missed, and the whole thing is presented like a quote from a news article and taken as fact by OP in their own commentary.
And the larger point I’m making is this pour soul had no idea Gemini is basically an improv actor compelled to continue whatever it writes, not a research agent.
My sister, ridiculously smart, professional and more put together than I am, didn’t either. She just searched for factual stuff from the Gemini app and assumed it’s directly searching the internet.
AI is a good thinker, analyzer, spitballer, initial source and stuff yes, but it’s being marketed like an oracle and that is going to screw the world up.
I agree 😇
No one understands how LLMs work, not even on a basic level.
Well that’s just false.
Educate my family on how they work then please and thanks. I’ve tried and they refuse to listen, they’d prefer to trust the lying corpos trying to sell it to us
“Your family” isn’t who I was talking about. Researchers and people in the space understand how LLMs work in intricate detail.
Unless your “no one” was colloquial, then yes, I totally agree with you! Practically no one understands how they work.
colloquially, no one enjoys a pedant
You know what I meant, by no one I mean “a large majority of users.”
I did not know that. There’s a bunch of news articles going around claiming that even the creators of the models don’t understand them and that they are some sort of unfathomable magic black box. I assumed you were propagating that myth, but I was clearly mistaken.
Also… the tremendous irony here is Meta is screwing themselves over.
They’ve hedged their future on AI, and are smart enough to release the weights and fund open research, yet their advantage (a big captive dataset, aka Facebook/Instagram/WhatsApp users) is completely overrun with slop that poisons it. It’s as laughable as Grok (X’s AI) being trained on Twitter.
Meta is probably screwed already. Their user base is not growing as before, maybe shrinking in some markets, and they need the padding to cover it up.
Very true.
But also so stupid because their user base is, what, a good fraction of the planet? How can they grow?
this is ai gen so stop it
This is a pretty sweet ad for https://originality.ai/ai-checker
They don’t talk much about their secret sauce. That 40% figure is based on “trust me bro, our tool is really good”. Would have been nice to be able to verify this figure / use the technique elsewhere.
It’s pretty tiring to keep seeing ads masquerading as research.
damn no wonder i feel so cheap after scrolling a fb feed for an hour
8k posts sounds like 0.00014 percent of Facebook posts
It probably is but it’s a large sample size and if the selection is random enough, it’s likely sufficient to extrapolate some numbers. This is basically how drug testing works.
> uses ai slop to illustrate it
The most annoying part of that is the shitty render. I actually have an account on one of those AI image generating sites, and I enjoy using it. If you’re not satisfied with the image, just roll a few more times, maybe tweak the prompt or the starter image, and try again. You can get some very cool-looking renders if you give a damn. Case in point:
😍this is awesome!
A friend of mine has made this with your described method:
PS: 😆the laptop on the illustration in the article! Someone did not want pay for high end model and did not want to to take any extra time neither…
Seems like an appropriate use of the tech
That laptop lol.
how tf did it take 6 years to analyze 8000 posts
I pretty sure they selected posts from a 6 year period, not that they spent six years on the analysis.
In that case, how/why did they only choose 8000 posts over 6 years? Facebook probably gets more than 8000 new posts per minute.
Every study uses sampling. They don’t have the resources to check everything. I have to imagine it took a lot of work to verify conclusively whether something was or was not generated. It’s a much larger sample size than a lot of studies.
I have to imagine it took a lot of work to verify conclusively whether something was or was not generated
The study is by a company that creates software to detect AI content, so it’s literally their whole job
(it also means there’s a conflict of interest, since they want to show how much content their detector can detect)
It’s a much larger sample size than a lot of studies.
It’s an extremely small proportion of the total number of Facebook posts though. Nowhere near enough for statistical significance.
I was wondering how far I’d have to scroll before getting to someone who doesn’t understand statistics complaining about the sample size…
There’s likely been trillions of posts on Facebook during that time frame. Is a sample size of 8000 really sufficient for a corpus that large?
I can’t even fathom how they would go about testing if it’s an AI or not. I can’t imagine that’s an exact science either.
I wouldn’t be surprised, but I’d be interested to see what they used to make that determination. All of the AI detection I know of are prone to a lot of false-positives.
Deleted my account a little while ago but for my feed I think it was higher. You couldn’t block them fast enough, and mostly obviously AI pictures that if the comments are to be believed as being actual humans…people believed were real. It was a total nightmare land. I’m sad that I have now lost contact with the few distant friends I had on there but otherwise NOTHING lost.
