It must be tiring to be this narrow-minded.

its not a comment its in the post and its alpha, they'll prob add an option for it to be closed by default.

True, but its a tiny summary one sentence, im less likely to click the link when I see the fat human written summary at the top of reddit comments

What's wrong with AI summaries? AI has it's uses. A long as it's just adding some metadata I don't see nothing wrong with it.

For me the big questions is what are they going to do to stop bots, spam and internet points farming. So far they didn't reveal any plans.

AI. BOTS. MILLENIAL INFANTILE DESIGN. CORPORATE SPEAK.

Gee, I wonder why people aren't tripping over themselves to join this.

concepts that have been whipped up in Photoshop aren't "first looks"

The hero no one wanted, or needed

But other than that. Cool

The internet has way too many AI bots, let's add some more

- Digg logic

What's wrong with AI summaries?

It never stops there though, they never just write their summary and leave it alone they always have to have the AI do more and more until it eventually takes over the entire platform.

This one is different, it starts enshittified and enshittifies further

The article says an iOS app was released to testers.

but that's not my first look as the title states.

The thing that's mostly wrong with AI summaries is that people don't click through to the page the summary summarizes. So those sites don't get ad revenue. That's ad revenue is the backbone of the internet for a lot of sites. If there's no site posting the information then the AI has nothing to summarize and provide an overview of. The pivot to AI LLM's is likely to kill the companies who aggregate links, and they're pushing for it hoping to make it profitable in the long term because they've been actively enshittifying ad aggregation via search for the purposes of big number must go up (you know, for the shareholders). It's defeatist to the current business model of most of the internet. And the shareholders do not care so long as they get their money.

You're right, it's not a comment. It supersedes comments. Digg is literally showing you an AI-first ecosystem.

This isn't some UI glitch. It's a feature they stuck front and center. Digg is trying to start a second honeymoon period with users. Why do you think things would get better after that?

The thing that's mostly wrong with AI summaries is that people don't click through to the page the summary summarizes. So those sites don't get ad revenue.

Don’t ad blockers have a similar effect?

There are summaries of articles on lemmy, just not generated by LMMs. What's the difference?

Why the fuck would I want my link aggregator to have a leaderboard?

People competing for fake internet points is already driving some of the worst patterns we're seeing on the social web. Imagine putting that shit front and center.

Not exactly. People don't click on ads when ads are blocked. But ad aggregation companies get paid in a couple of different ways. Click through is a big one, but ad impressions (eyeballs that supposedly viewed an ad) are also a thing. And impressions pay, just not as well as clickthroughs. Ad companies haven't stopped paying aggregates for ad space. That's why ads on paid services have gotten more egregious. It's not because they aren't getting paid. It's because they want both.

For what it's worth, you can (and some do) pay for subscriptions to websites or services on the internet. But nobody is paying ad aggregation companies with the intent of seeing ads regardless of the reality.

Also, ad blocking as a whole is for security as much as it is for quality of life. Ad aggregation companies have a habit of taking the money and asking questions only when they get complaints (if then) and as a result, they don't leave users who want to protect themselves another choice.

Of course, there's also the fact that one way or another the web can't just be free. Someone somewhere has to pay for the resources that make it run and the upkeep it requires.

Depends. I often click on articles based on the summary because the article link is usually posted before the summary is. Sometimes the summary doesn't really explain enough for me to understand. Other times I want to know more. But when you use chatgpt to answer a query usually you don't leave that page in order to get more information and that's the problem I'm pointing out. Usually you don't even have a link to where the information in the summary came from either (my experience is limited to Google's Gemini, which I don't use, but which for a while was front and center on any query I typed in).