100%

All two jobs 🤮🤮🤮 as they poison and deplete the locals resources.

I just do not like that these companies who are being paid lots of money by PR firms are not transparent and their word is taken as gospel. The way they're presenting their "findings" they literally could say whatever they want.

Just something to think about aprapos of nothing 😉

person that's paying them. Also it's interesting how it's this topic seems weird, bet it's bots — always leads to bots 🙄 What's the baseline for bots on a given trending topic? No idea! Wouldn't that be a helpful thing to know when you're claiming bots are what caused a topic to get popular?

accounts and helps build the accounts reputation, however I've yet to see a data company successfully lay out that the bot accounts are what contributed and drove the 70% of organic discussion. I've seen it done very clumsily and poorly, with a whole lot of cherry picking to fit the narrative of the

that 30% of activity on social media were bots, but then you're not giving info on how you're correlating that 30% driving the rest of the 70%. In social media it's common for things that are already being discussed to get a push from both real and bot accounts, it boosts eyes on those

Why does this matter? These companies are used to push narratives about how criticism of people is a coordinated attack of bots, when (even within their own research), the bot activity may not be what's driving the topic. For example, let's say you find (with whatever random ass criteria you use)

networks, their criteria for confirming bots often doesn't align with how these companies say they detect bots (IF they even explain how they're determining bot posts).

not correct as we've seen on here with accounts asking for donations (mass messaging/replying with your gofund me is gonna be flagged regardless of what kind of account/location you're from). This does not make the account a bot account and if you've ever followed an account that researches bot

either: 1. Have an inconsistent criteria for "bot" behavior OR 2. Are incredibly opaque about how they're coming to that decision.

I don't want to name the companies because that's a whole mess, but I've seen these data companies claim spamming behavior ALWAYS means the account is a bot, which is

Exactly. We're at the point where all these companies are absolutely waging class warfare on workers. Laying off people left and right to make people scared to leave their jobs or speak up and take low ass pay, while milking as much labor out of their 2 workers doing the work of 5. I'm sick of it.

And even the smallest use cases where it's actually helpful I'm like this could be solved with better documentation, not something that pulls so much energy and costs so much — it's like burning down a house to keep warm in the winter.

100% - The saddest thing is I've had the dumbest conversations with people once we pushed AI so hard, because it truly does kill critical thinking in a very crazy almost instant way. I've only kept my sanity because I refuse to throw AI at everything.

Yes, yes! My biggest pet peeve has been work trying to get me to use AI for all writing... My degree is in English Literature writing is my biggest strength and something I love to do (I just happen to work in tech). So many people don't want to take the time to learn to communicate effectively.

Yes Utah should be embarrassed