Why Is Meta Experimenting With AI To Write Comments?
April 18, 2025
Who knows why Meta does anything original? Amazon uses AI to write snapshots of book series. Therefore, Meta is using AI to write comments. We were not surprised to read “Meta Is Experimenting With AI-Generated Comments, For Some Reason."
Meta is using AI to write Instagram comments. It sounds like a very stupid idea, but Meta is doing it. Some Instagram accounts can see a new icon to the left of the text field after choosing to leave a comment. The icon is a pencil with a star. When the icon is tapped, a new Meta AI menu pops up, and offers a selection of comment choices. These comments are presumed to be based off whatever content the comment corresponds to in the post.
It doesn’t take much effort to write a simple Instagram comment, but offloading the task appears to take more effort than completing the task yourself. Plus, Instagram is already plagued with chatbot comments already. Does it need more? Nope.
Here’s what the author Jake Peterson requests of his readers:
“Writing comments isn’t hard, and yet, someone at Meta thought there was a usefulness—a market—for AI-generated comments. They probably want more training data for their AI machine, which tracks, considering companies are running out of internet for models to learn from. But that doesn’t mean we should be okay with outsourcing all human tasks to AI.
Mr. Peterson suggest that what bugs him the most is users happily allowing hallucinating software to perform cognitive tasks and make decision for people like me. Right on, Mr. Peterson.
Whitney Grace, April 18, 2025
Google: Keep a Stiff Upper Lip and Bring Fiat Currency Other Than Dollars
April 17, 2025
No AI, just the dinobaby himself.
Poor Googzilla. After decades of stomping through virtual barrier, those lovers of tea, fried fish, and cricket have had enough. I think some UK government officials have grown tired of, as Monty Python said:
“..what I object to is you automatically treat me as an inferior..” “Well, I am KING.”
“Google Faces £5bn UK Lawsuit” reports:
The lawsuit alleges that the tech giant has abused its dominant market position to prevent both existing and potential competitors from entering the general search and search advertising markets, thereby allowing Google to impose supra-competitive advertising prices. The lawsuit seeks compensation for thousands of UK advertisers impacted by the company’s actions.
Will Googzilla trample this pesky lawsuit the way cinematic cities fell to the its grandfather, Godzilla?
Key allegations include Google’s contracts with smartphone manufacturers and network operators that mandate the pre-installation of Google Search and the Chrome browser on Android devices. The suit also highlights Google’s agreement with Apple, under which it pays to remain the default search engine on iPhones. Plaintiffs argue that these practices have made Google the only practical platform for online search advertising.
I know little about the UK, but I did work for an outfit on Clarendon Terrace, adjacent Buckingham Palace, for a couple of years. I figured out that the US and UK government officials were generally cooperative, but there were some interesting differences.
Obviously there is the Monty Python canon. Another point of differentiation is a tendency to keep a stiff upper lip and then bang!
The wonderful Google and its quantumly supreme approach to business may be approaching one of those bang moments. Will Google’s solicitors prevail?
I am not very good at fancy probability and nifty gradient descent calculations. I would suggest that Googzilla bring a check book or a valid cargo container filled with an acceptable fiat currency. Pounds, euros, or Swiss francs are probably acceptable at this particular point in business history.
Oh, that £5bn works out to 5.4 million Swiss francs.
Stephen E Arnold, April 17, 2025
Trust: Zuck, Meta, and Llama 4
April 17, 2025
Sorry, no AI used to create this item.
CNET published a very nice article that says to me: “Hey, we don’t trust you.” Navigate to “Meta Llama 4 Benchmarking Confusion: How Good Are the New AI Models?” The write up is like a wimpy version of the old PC Perspective podcast with Ryan Shrout. Before the embrace of Intel’s intellectual blanket, the podcast would raise questions about video card benchmarks. Most of the questions addressed: “Is this video card that fast?” In some cases, yes, the video card benchmarks were close to the real world. In other cases, video card manufacturers did what the butcher on Knoxville Avenue did in 1951. Mr. Wilson put his thumb on the scale. My grandmother watched friendly Mr. Wilson who drove a new Buick in a very, very modest neighborhood, closely. He did not smile as broadly when my grandmother and I would enter the store for a chicken.
Would someone put an AI professional benchmarked to this type of test? Of course not. But the idea has a certain charm. Plus, if the person dies, he was fooling. If the person survives, that individual is definitely a witch. This was a winner method to some enlightened leaders at one time.
The CNET story says about the Zuck’s most recent non-virtual reality investment:
Meta’s Llama 4 models Maverick and Scout are out now, but they might not be the best models on the market.
That’s a good way to say, “Liar, liar, pants on fire.”
The article adds:
the model that Meta actually submitted to the LMArena tests is not the model that is available for people to use now. The model submitted for testing is called “llama-4-maverick-03-26-experimental.” In a footnote on a chart on Llama’s website (not the announcement), in tiny font in the final bullet point, Meta clarifies that the model submitted to LMArena was ‘optimized for conversationality.”
Isn’t this a GenZ way to say, “You put your thumb on the scale, Mr. Wilson”?
Let’s review why one should think about the desire to make something better than it is:
- Meta’s decision is just marketing. Think about the self driving Teslas. Consequences? Not for fibbing.
- The Meta engineers have to deliver good news. Who wants to tell the Zuck that the Llama innovations are like making the VR thing a big winner? Answer: No one who wants to get a bonus and curry favor.
- Meta does not have the ability to distinguish good from bad. The model swap is what Meta is going to do anyway. So why not just use it? No big deal. Is this a moral and ethical dead zone?
What’s interesting is that from my point of view, Meta and the Zuck have a standard operating procedure. I am not sure that aligns with what some people expect. But as long as the revenue flows and meaningful regulation of social media remains a windmill for today’s Don Quixotes, Meta is the best — until another AI leader puts out a quantumly supreme news release.
Stephen E Arnold, April 17, 2025
Google AI Search: A Wrench in SEO Methods
April 17, 2025
Does AI finally spell the end of SEO? Or will it supercharge the practice? Pymnts declares, “Google’s AI Search Switch Leaves Indie Websites Unmoored.” The brief write-up states:
“Google’s AI-generated search answers have reportedly not been good for independent websites. Those answers, along with Google’s alterations to its search algorithm in support of them, have caused traffic to those websites to plunge, Bloomberg News reported Monday (April 7), citing interviews with 25 publishers and people working with them. The changes, Bloomberg said, threaten a ‘delicate symbiotic relationship’ between businesses and Google: they generate good content, and the tech giant sends them traffic. According to the report, many publishers said they either need to shut down or revamp their distribution strategy. Experts this effort could ultimately reduce the quality of information Google can access for its search results and AI answers.”
To add insult to injury, we are reminded, AI Search’s answers are often inaccurate. SEO pros are scrambling to adapt to this new reality. We learn:
“‘It’s important for businesses to think of more than just pure on-page SEO optimization,’ Ben Poulton, founder of the SEO agency Intellar, told PYMNTS. ‘AI overviews tend to try and showcase the whole experience. That means additional content, more FAQs answered, customer feedback addressed on the page, details about walking distance and return policies for brands with a brick-and-mortar, all need to be readily available, as that will give you the best shot of being featured,’ Poulton said.”
So it sounds like one thing has not changed: Second to buying Google ads, posting thoroughly good content is the best way to surface in search results. Or, now, to donate knowledge for the algorithm to spit out. Possibly with hallucinations mixed in.
Cynthia Murrell, April 17, 2025
Google AI: Invention Is the PR Game
April 17, 2025
Google was so excited to tout its AI’s great achievement: In under 48 hours, It solved a medical problem that vexed human researchers for a decade. Great! Just one hitch. As Pivot to AI tells us, "Google Co-Scientist AI Cracks Superbug Problem in Two Days!—Because It Had Been Fed the Team’s Previous Paper with the Answer In It." With that detail, the feat seems much less impressive. In fact, two days seems downright sluggish. Writer David Gerard reports:
"The hype cycle for Google’s fabulous new AI Co-Scientist tool, based on the Gemini LLM, includes a BBC headline about how José Penadés’ team at Imperial College asked the tool about a problem he’d been working on for years — and it solved it in less than 48 hours! [BBC; Google] Penadés works on the evolution of drug-resistant bacteria. Co-Scientist suggested the bacteria might be hijacking fragments of DNA from bacteriophages. The team said that if they’d had this hypothesis at the start, it would have saved years of work. Sounds almost too good to be true! Because it is. It turns out Co-Scientist had been fed a 2023 paper by Penadés’ team that included a version of the hypothesis. The BBC coverage failed to mention this bit. [New Scientist, archive]"
It seems this type of Googley AI over-brag is a pattern. Gerard notes the company claims Co-Scientist identified new drugs for liver fibrosis, but those drugs had already been studied for this use. By humans. He also reminds us of this bit of truth-stretching from 2023:
"Google loudly publicized how DeepMind had synthesized 43 ‘new materials’ — but studies in 2024 showed that none of the materials was actually new, and that only 3 of 58 syntheses were even successful. [APS; ChemrXiv]"
So the next time Google crows about an AI achievement, we have to keep in mind that AI often is a synonym for PR.
Cynthia Murrell, April 17, 2026
The French Are Going After Enablers: Other Countries May Follow
April 16, 2025
Another post by the dinobaby. Judging by the number of machine-generated images of young female “entities” I receive, this 80-year-old must be quite fetching to some scammers with AI. Who knew?
Enervated by the French judiciary’s ability to reason with Pavel Durov, the Paris Judicial Tribunal is going after what I call “enablers.” The term applies to the legitimate companies which make their online services available to customers. With the popularity of self-managed virtual machines, the online services firms receive an online order, collect a credit card, validate it, and let the remote customer set up and manage a computing resource.
Hey, the approach is popular and does not require expensive online service technical staff to do the handholding. Just collect the money and move forward. I am not sure the Paris Judicial Tribunal is interested in virtual anything. According to “French Court Orders Cloudflare to ‘Dynamically’ Block MotoGP Streaming Piracy”:
In the seemingly endless game of online piracy whack-a-mole, a French court has ordered Cloudflare to block several sites illegally streaming MotoGP. The ruling is an escalation of French blocking measures that began increasing their scope beyond traditional ISPs in the last few months of 2024. Obtained by MotoGP rightsholder Canal+, the order applies to all Cloudflare services, including DNS, and can be updated with ‘future’ domains.
The write up explains:
The reasoning behind the blocking request is similar to a previous blocking order, which also targeted OpenDNS and Google DNS. It is grounded in Article L. 333-10 of the French Sports Code, which empowers rightsholders to seek court orders against any outfit that can help to stop ‘serious and repeated’ sports piracy. This time, SECP’s demands are broader than DNS blocking alone. The rightsholder also requested blocking measures across Cloudflare’s other services, including its CDN and proxy services.
The approach taken by the French provides a framework which other countries can use to crack down on what seem to be legal online services. Many of these outfits expose one face to the public and regulators. Like the fictional Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, these online service firms make it possible for bad actors to perform a number of services to a special clientele; for example:
- Providing outlets for hate speech
- Hosting all or part of a Dark Web eCommerce site
- Allowing “roulette wheel” DNS changes for streaming sites distributing sports events
- Enabling services used by encrypted messaging companies whose clientele engages in illegal activity
- Hosting images of a controversial nature.
How can this be? Today’s technology makes it possible for an individual to do a search for a DMCA ignored advertisement for a service provider. Then one locates the provider’s Web site. Using a stolen credit card and the card owner’s identity, the bad actor signs up for a service from these providers:
This is a partial list of Dark Web hosting services compiled by SporeStack. Do you recognize the vendors Digital Ocean or Vultr? I recognized one.
These providers offer virtual machines and an API for interaction. With a bit of effort, the online providers have set up a vendor-customer experience that allows the online provider to say, “We don’t know what customer X is doing.” A cyber investigator has to poke around hunting for the “service” identified in the warrant in the hopes that the “service” will not be “gone.”
My view is that the French court may be ready to make life a bit less comfortable for some online service providers. The cited article asserts:
… the blockades may not stop at the 14 domain names mentioned in the original complaint. The ‘dynamic’ order allows SECP to request additional blockades from Cloudflare, if future pirate sites are flagged by French media regulator, ARCOM. Refusal to comply could see Cloudflare incur a €5,000 daily fine per site. “[Cloudflare is ordered to implement] all measures likely to prevent, until the date of the last race in the MotoGP season 2025, currently set for November 16, 2025, access to the sites identified above, as well as to sites not yet identified at the date of the present decision,” the order reads.
The US has a proposed site blocking bill as well.
But the French may continue to push forward using the “Pavel Durov action” as evidence that sitting on one’s hands and worrying about international repercussions is a waste of time. If companies like Amazon and Google operate in France, the French could begin tire kicking in the hopes of finding a bad wheel.
Mr. Durov believed he was not going to have a problem in France. He is a French citizen. He had the big time Kaminski firm represent him. He has lots of money. He has 114 children. What could go wrong? For starters, the French experience convinced him to begin cooperating with law enforcement requests.
Now France is getting some first hand experience with the enablers. Those who dismiss France as a land with too many different types of cheese may want to spend a few moments reading about French methods. Only one nation has some special French judicial savoir faire.
Stephen E Arnold, April 16, 2025
AI Impacts Jobs: But Just 40 Percent of Them
April 16, 2025
AI enthusiasts would have us believe workers have nothing to fear from the technology. In fact, they gush, AI will only make our jobs easier by taking over repetitive tasks and allowing time for our creative juices to flow. It is a nice vision. Far-fetched, but nice. Euronews reports, “AI Could Impact 40 Percent of Jobs Worldwide in the Next Decade, UN Agency Warns.” Writer Anna Desmarais cites a recent report as she tells us:
“Artificial intelligence (AI) may impact 40 per cent of jobs worldwide, which could mean overall productivity growth but many could lose their jobs, a new report from the United Nations Department of Trade and Development (UNCTAD) has found. The report … says that AI could impact jobs in four main ways: either by replacing or complementing human work, deepening automation, and possibly creating new jobs, such as in AI research or development.”
So it sounds like we could possibly reach a sort of net-zero on jobs. However, it will take deliberate action to get there. And we are not currently pointed in the right direction:
“A handful of companies that control the world’s advancement in AI ‘often favour capital over labour,’ the report continues, which means there is a risk that AI ‘reduces the competitive advantage’ of low-cost labour from developing countries. Rebeca Grynspan, UCTAD’s Secretary-General, said in a statement that there needs to be stronger international cooperation to shift the focus away ‘from technology to people’.”
Oh, is that all? Easy peasy. The post notes it is not just information workers under threat—when combined with other systems, AI can also perform physical production jobs. Desmarais concludes:
“The impact that AI is going to have on the labour force depends on how automation, augmentation, and new positions interact. The UNCTAD said developing countries need to invest in reliable internet connections, making high-quality data sets available to train AI systems and building education systems that give them necessary digital skills, the report added. To do this, UNCTAD recommends building a shared global facility that would share AI tools and computing power equitably between nations.”
Will big tech and agencies around the world pull together to make it happen?
Cynthia Murrell, April 16, 2025
China Smart, US Dumb: The Fluid Mechanics Problem Solved
April 16, 2025
There are many puzzles that haven’t been solved, but with advanced technology and new ways of thinking some of them are finally getting answered. Two Chinese mathematicians working in the United States claim to have solved an old puzzle involving fluid mechanics says the South China Morning Post: “Chinese Mathematicians Say They Have Cracked Century-Old Fluid Mechanics Puzzle.”
Fluid mechanics is a study used in engineering and it is applied to aerodynamics, dams and bridges design, and hydraulic systems. The Chinese mathematicians are Deng Yu from the University of Chicago and Ma Xiao from the University of Michigan. They were joined by their international collaborator Zaher Hani also of the University of Michigan. They published a paper to arXiv-a platform that posts research papers before they are peer reviewed. The team said they found a solution to “Hilbert’s sixth problem.
What exactly did the mathematicians solve?
“At the intersection of physics and mathematics, researchers ask whether it is possible to establish physics as a rigorous branch of mathematics by taking microscopic laws as axioms and proving macroscopic laws as theorems. Axioms are mathematical statements that are assumed to be true, while a theorem is a logical consequence of axioms.
Hilbert’s sixth problem addresses that challenge, according to a post by Ma on Wednesday on Zhihu, a Quora-like Chinese online content platform.”
David Hilbert proposed this as one of twenty-three problems he presented in 1900 at the International Congress of Mathematicians. China is taking credit for these mathematicians and their work. China wants to point out how smart it is, while it likes to poke fun at the “dumb” United States. Let’s make our own point that these Chinese mathematicians are living and working in the United States.
Whitney Grace, April 16, 2025
Google Wears a Necklace and Sneakers with Flashing Blue LEDs. Snazzy.
April 15, 2025
No AI. Just an old dinobaby pointing out some exciting developments in the world “beyond search.”
I can still see the flashing blue light in Aisle 7. Yes, there goes the siren. K-Mart in Central Illinois was running a big sale on underwear. My mother loved those “blue light specials.” She would tell me as I covered my eyes and ears, “I don’t want to miss out.” Into the scrum she would go, emerging with two packages of purple boxer shorts for my father. He sat in the car while my mother shopped. I accompanied her because that’s what sons in Central Illinois do. I wonder if procurement officials are familiar with blue light specials. The sirens in DC wail 24×7.
Thanks, OpenAI. You produced a good enough illustration. A first!
I thought about K-Mart when I read “Google Slashes Business Software Prices for US Federal Agencies.” I see that flickering blue light as I type this short blog post. The trusted “real” news source reports:
Google will offer steep discounts to U.S. federal agencies for its business apps package as the company looks to capitalize on the Trump administration’s cost-cutting push and chip away at Microsoft’s longstanding grip on the government software market.
Yep, discounts. Now Microsoft has some traction in the US government. I cannot imagine what life would be like for aides to a senior Pentagon if he did not have nifty PowerPoint presentations. Perhaps offering a deal will get some Microsoft afficionados to learn to live without Excel and Word? I don’t know, but Google is giving the “discount” method a whirl.
What’s up with Google? I think someone told me that Gemini 2.5 was free. Now a discount on GSA listed services which could amount to $2 billion in savings … if — yes, that magic word — if the US government dumps the Softies’ outstanding products for the cloudy goodness of the Google’s way. Yep, “if.”
I have a cute anecdote about Google and the US government from the year 2000, but, alas, I cannot share it. Trust me. It is a knee slapper. And, no, it is not about Sergey wearing silver sparkle sneakers to meetings with US elected officials. Those were indeed eye catchers among shoes with toes that looked like potatoes.
Several observations:
- Google, like Amazon, is trying to obtain US government business. I think the flashing blue lights, if I were still working in the hallowed halls, would impair my vision. Price cutting seems to be the one true way right now.
- Will lower prices have an impact on US government procurement? I am not sure. The procurement process chugs along every day and in quite predictable ways. How long does it take to turn a battleship, assuming the captain can pull off the maneuver without striking a small fishing boat, of course.
- Google seems to think that slashing prices for its “products” will boost sales. My understanding of Google is that its sale to government agencies pivots on several characteristics; for example, [a] listening and understanding what government professionals say, [b] providing a modicum of customer support or at the very least answering a phone call from a government professional, and [c] delivering products that the aides, assistants, and contractors understand and can use to crank out documents with numbered lines, dense charts, and bullet points that mostly stay in place after a graphic is inserted.
To sum up, I find the idea of price cuts interesting. My initial reaction is that price cuts and procurement are not necessarily lined up procedurally. But I am a dinobaby. But after 50 years of “government” work I have a keen desire to see if the Google can shine enough blue lights to bedazzle people involved in purchasing software to keep the admirals happy. (I speak from a little experience working with the late Admiral Craig Hosmer, R-Calif. whom I thank for his service.)
Stephen E Arnold, April 15, 2025
Oracle: Pricked by a Rose and Still Bleeding
April 15, 2025
How disappointing. DoublePulsar documents a senior tech giant’s duplicity in, “Oracle Attempt to Hide Serious Cybersecurity Incident from Customers in Oracle SaaS Service.” Blogger Kevin Beaumont cites reporting by Bleeping Computer as he tells us someone going by rose87168 announced in March they had breached certain Oracle services. The hacker offered to remove individual companies’ data for a price. They also invited Oracle to email them to discuss the matter. The company, however, immediately denied there had been a breach. It should know better by now.
Rose87168 responded by releasing evidence of the breach, piece by piece. For example, they shared a recording of an internal Oracle meeting, with details later verified by Bleeping Computer and Hudson Rock. They also shared the code for Oracle configuration files, which proved to be current. Beaumont writes:
“In data released to a journalist for validation, it has now become 100% clear to me that there has been cybersecurity incident at Oracle, involving systems which processed customer data. … All the systems impacted are directly managed by Oracle. Some of the data provided to journalists is current, too. This is a serious cybersecurity incident which impacts customers, in a platform managed by Oracle. Oracle are attempting to wordsmith statements around Oracle Cloud and use very specific words to avoid responsibility. This is not okay. Oracle need to clearly, openly and publicly communicate what happened, how it impacts customers, and what they’re doing about it. This is a matter of trust and responsibility. Step up, Oracle — or customers should start stepping off.”
In an update to the original post, Beaumont notes some linguistic slight-of-hand employed by the company:
“Oracle rebadged old Oracle Cloud services to be Oracle Classic. Oracle Classic has the security incident. Oracle are denying it on ‘Oracle Cloud’ by using this scope — but it’s still Oracle cloud services that Oracle manage. That’s part of the wordplay.”
However, it seems the firm finally admitted the breach was real to at least some users. Just not in in black and white. We learn:
“Multiple Oracle cloud customers have reached out to me to say Oracle have now confirmed a breach of their services. They are only doing so verbally, they will not write anything down, so they’re setting up meetings with large customers who query. This is similar behavior to the breach of medical PII in the ongoing breach at Oracle Health, where they will only provide details verbally and not in writing.”
So much for transparency. Beaumont pledges to keep investigating the breach and Oracle’s response to it. He invites us to follow his Mastodon account for updates.
Cynthis Murrell, April 15, 2025
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
