Social media platforms like Twitter and Reddit are increasingly infested with bots and fake accounts, leading to significant manipulation of public discourse. These bots don’t just annoy users—they skew visibility through vote manipulation. Fake accounts and automated scripts systematically downvote posts opposing certain viewpoints, distorting the content that surfaces and amplifying specific agendas.

Before coming to Lemmy, I was systematically downvoted by bots on Reddit for completely normal comments that were relatively neutral and not controversial​ at all. Seemed to be no pattern in it… One time I commented that my favorite game was WoW, down voted -15 for no apparent reason.

For example, a bot on Twitter using an API call to GPT-4o ran out of funding and started posting their prompts and system information publicly.

https://www.dailydot.com/debug/chatgpt-bot-x-russian-campaign-meme/

Example shown here

Bots like these are probably in the tens or hundreds of thousands. They did a huge ban wave of bots on Reddit, and some major top level subreddits were quiet for days because of it. Unbelievable…

How do we even fix this issue or prevent it from affecting Lemmy??

  • adr1an@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    12 days ago

    On an instance level, you can close registration after a threshold level of users that you are comfortable with. Then, you can defederate the instances that are driven by capitalistic ideals like eternal growth (e.g. Threads from meta)

  • Otter@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    15 days ago

    1. The platform needs an incentive to get rid of bots.

    Bots on Reddit pump out an advertiser friendly firehose of “content” that they can pretend is real to their investors, while keeping people scrolling longer. On Fediverse platforms there isn’t a need for profit or growth. Low quality spam just becomes added server load we need to pay for.

    I’ve mentioned it before, but we ban bots very fast here. People report them fast and we remove them fast. Searching the same scam link on Reddit brought up accounts that have been posting the same garbage for months.

    Twitter and Reddit benefit from bot activity, and don’t have an incentive to stop it.

    2. We need tools to detect the bots so we can remove them.

    Public vote counts should help a lot towards catching manipulation on the fediverse. Any action that can affect visibility (upvotes and comments) can be pulled by researchers through federation to study/catch inorganic behavior.

    Since the platforms are open source, instances could even set up tools that look for patterns locally, before it gets out.

    It’ll be an arm’s race, but it wouldn’t be impossible.

  • UndercoverUlrikHD@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    15 days ago

    A chain/tree of trust. If a particular parent node has trusted a lot of users that proves to be malicious bots, you break the chain of trust by removing the parent node. Orphaned real users would then need to find a new account that is willing to trust them, while the bots are left out hanging.

    Not sure how well it would work on federated platforms though.

      • UndercoverUlrikHD@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        15 days ago

        You could always ask someone to vouch for you. It could also be that you have open communities and closed communities. So you would build up trust in an open community before being trusted by someone to be allowed to interact with the closed communities. Open communities could be communities less interesting/harder for the bots to spam and closed communities could be the high risk ones, such as news and politics.

        Would this greatly reduce the user friendliness of the site? Yes. But it would be an option if bots turn into a serious problem.

        I haven’t really thought through the details and I’m not sure how well it would work for a decentralised network though. Would each instance run their own trust tree, or would trusted instances share a single trust database 🤷‍♂️

  • Dark Arc@social.packetloss.gg
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    15 days ago

    I’ve been thinking postcard based account validation for online services might be a strategy to fight bots.

    As in, rather than an email address, you register with a physical address and get mailed a post card.

    A server operator would then have to approve mailing 1,000 post cards to whatever address the bot operator was working out of. The cost of starting and maintaining a bot farm skyrockets as a result (you not only have to pay to get the postcard, you have to maintain a physical presence somewhere … and potentially a lot of them if you get banned/caught with any frequency).

    Similarly, most operators would presumably only mail to folks within their nation’s mail system. So if Russia wanted to create a bunch of US accounts on “mainstream” US hosted services, they’d have to physically put agents inside of the United States that are receiving these postcards … and now the FBI can treat this like any other organized domestic crime syndicate.

    • Scribble902@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      15 days ago

      I was thinking physical mail too. But I think It definitely would require some sort of system that is either third party or government backed that annonomyses you like how the covid Bluetooth tracing system worked (stupidly called track and trace in the UK). Plus you’d have to interact with someone at a postal office to legitimise it. But I’m talking, just a worker at a counter.

      So you’d get a one time unique annonomysed postal address. You go to a post office and hand your letter over to someone. You, and perhaps they, will not know the address, but the system will. Maybe a process which re-envelopes the letter down the line into a letter with the real address on.

      This way, you’ve kept the server owner private and you’ve had to involve some form of person to person interaction meaning, not a bot!

      This system could be used for all sorts of verification other than for socal media so may have enough incentive for governments/3rd partys to set up to use beyond that.

      Could it be abused though and if how are there solutions to mitigate them?

    • wuphysics87@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      13 days ago

      While a good solution in principle, it could (and likely will) false flag accounts. Such a system should be a first line with a review as a second.

  • sumguyonline@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    13 days ago

    Make your own bot account that randomly(or not randomly) posts something bots will reply to, a system based response preferably. Last I was looking at bots they were simply programs, and have dev commands that can return information on things like system resources, or OS version. Your bot posts commands built in from the bot apps Dev, the bots reply like bots do with their version, system resources, or whatever they have built in. Boom - Banned instantly.