use the following search parameters to narrow your results:
e.g. subreddit:pics site:imgur.com dog
subreddit:pics site:imgur.com dog
advanced search: by author, sub...
~6 users here now
I been thinking about reddit..
submitted 2 years ago by andrewblanchard from self.whatever
view the rest of the comments →
[–]thefirststone 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun - 2 years ago (3 children)
No, but they do have more bots.
[–]andrewblanchard[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - 2 years ago (2 children)
Is there any reliable way to tell when I am chatting a bot?
Maybe there is a way to confuse or trip up or checkmate a bit?
Any ideas?
[–]thefirststone 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun - 2 years ago (1 child)
In theory, bots won't be able to react to the simplest of tangential references, personal questions, or anything which can't be completed by the simplest markov bot.
In practice, all responses on reddit are so obtuse that I can't tell if I'm dealing with a similacrum or somebody who's so deep in their own head that they can't converse normally. The only reason I'm sure that some reddit users aren't bots is that I've seen the brain-dead text that passes as conversation on related Discord channels.
There comes a point where substantive discourse itself is shunned, and reddit hit that point a few years ago. You ask a simple question, eager for information, and you're moderated to oblivion -- sometimes banned. There is no simple way to explain this. It's beyond parody, beyond moderation faults. They are tweaking their algorithm so that biological humans can not participate. If it's true there, it's true for Twitter and Facebook, I imagine.
[–]andrewblanchard[S] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun - 2 years ago (0 children)
I believe that the purpose of all this is like you said it is to create a situation where normal people cannot join into the conversation thank you for your very nice response
view the rest of the comments →
[–]thefirststone 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun - (3 children)
[–]andrewblanchard[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - (2 children)
[–]thefirststone 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun - (1 child)
[–]andrewblanchard[S] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun - (0 children)