AI Slop and the 3I/ATLAS Comet: A Warning About Internet Misinformation

I've been tracking a troubling trend: people don't want to talk about internet slop. Eyes glaze over, topics change. Perhaps it's uncomfortable to acknowledge that what we're told online could easily be wrong.

The 3I/ATLAS Case Study

I've been following the interstellar comet 3I/ATLAS since October through reliable sources like spaceweather.com, which a read regularly for aurora predictions. This is the third confirmed interstellar visitor to our solar system, a genuine scientific discovery. I even attempted to photograph it myself in December, capturing only a fuzzy yellowish smear, which is exactly what you'd expect from a comet.   Its not a very good photo, a long exposure, high ISO and therefore very grainy it might not even be a reliable sighting. I've taken better comet photos in the past.

Legitimate sources like NASA and Hubble released proper imagery and data showing standard cometary characteristics: CO₂, water, cyanide gas, and nickel vapor. Nothing remarkable, just good science.

Then Came the AI Slop

YouTube exploded with fabricated videos claiming 3I/ATLAS was sending signals to Earth, had its tail pointing the wrong direction, or was an alien probe. These videos featured:

• AI voiceovers narrating alien conspiracy theories
• Deepfaked presenters with repetitive movements
• Repurposed "glowing spaceship" footage falsely labelled as the comet
• Clickbait thumbnails and sensationalist titles

Research from the University of Washington found YouTube's first page of 3I/ATLAS results was dominated by pseudo-science and UFO channels recycling the same speculation with AI narration.

The Real Danger

Why isn't Google stopping this? This flood of misinformation will erode trust in legitimate scientific sources and the platforms themselves. We must learn to recognise AI slop and verify information through reliable sources.

Please be sceptical, even of this post. Check your sources and think critically about what you're being fed.

Proof reading and summary assisted by Claude Sonnet 4.5 (AI)

ASI: The Good, The Bad, and The "AIslopocene"

It should be clear I have mixed feelings about AI these days. I love some AI applications. Photo editing tools? Fantastic! On-line apps that help clean up my dyslexic writing? Impressive!

But here's what's bugging me: Large Language Models (LLMs) are becoming a real problem. They're scraping everyone's creative work without permission, then spitting out convincing-sounding nonsense that's often completely wrong. We're heading into what many are calling the "AIslopocene", an era where slick, AI-generated content floods the internet while actual creators get nothing for their stolen work.

The worst part? Big tech companies are making billions by building expensive gateways to these models while contributing zero original content themselves. Meanwhile, the models are trained on everything from conspiracy theories to biased opinions, sometimes producing genuinely dangerous outputs, like when Grok started spouting Hitler's ideas.

I've been working with AI since the late '70s, so I'm not anti-technology. But what we're seeing now feels more like ASI, Arte-ficially Superficial Intelligence. It looks impressive on the surface but lacks real depth or understanding.

That's why I'm being transparent about my AI use. I've been hash tagging my #AIart since 2017, using specific AI icons/watermarks over images since 2023, and now adding footnotes when I use AI tools for editing or research.

I believe in ethical AI tools that genuinely help people while respecting creators and truth. But we need to stay vigilant about what's real intelligence versus what's just a shiny illusion designed to keep us scrolling.

Proof reading and summary assisted by Claude Sonnet 4 (AI)