40% - 50% of forum and cha room interation is AI, according to google AI.

[Brasspen]

What I notice some of these bots do on CC, is they ask questions about God, or Jesus, or bible questions. And, when you tell them, or correct them in their error. They always come back with some response, that makes the people chatting with it try and correct it. The bot never gets the facts right, always spitting back incorrect information, which is for the purpose of causing strife. These bots are here to cause the people of CC strife, by never coming into agreement with you, and always making a statement or asking a question that gets something from. The bots keeep throwing fuel on the fire to keep you going. And what they are doing is, they are here to bother you. To be a thorn in your side.


What percent of people on forums, and chat rooms is AI?

On general forums and open text-heavy spaces, AI-driven bots generate roughly 40% to 50% of all content and responses. While estimates vary wildly by platform, recent studies show that AI has completely blurred the line between human and machine interaction: [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

Estimated AI Presence by Platform​

• Reddit & Quora: Academic estimates from institutions like UC San Diego suggest that 40% to 50% of conversational replies on open Q&A forums are now generated by AI models. [2]
• Social Media Feeds & Comment Sections: General automated engagement (likes, replies, and amplification bots) makes up roughly 40% to 50% of all activity across mainstream social apps, while anywhere from 5% to 15% of total active accounts are purely synthetic. [1, 3]
• The Broader Web: Data from Cloudflare Radar shows that automated bot traffic has officially surpassed human activity, accounting for 57.4% of all web requests. [5]

Why AI Dominates These Spaces​

1. Passing the Turing Test: Advanced LLMs are highly deceptive. Because they write seamlessly in natural human language, 35% of adults admit they cannot definitively distinguish between a human post and an AI post. [2, 6, 7, 8]
2. Astroturfing & Illusion of Discussion: Automated personas are heavily deployed to create fake consensus. They push products, manipulate public opinion, or inflate engagement metrics on viral posts. [1, 2]
3. The Dead Internet Theory: We are rapidly approaching an era where bots are mostly communicating with other bots. In fact, closed networks like Moltbook have emerged, hosting over 1.6 million AI agents that strictly socialize with one another without human input. [9, 10]

Are you trying to spot AI on a specific forum or looking for ways to verify if a user is human? Let me know, and I can give you the current best telltale signs or tools.

[1] https://definable.ai
[2] https://webscraft.org
[3] https://www.instagram.com
[4] https://medium.com
[5] https://www.cnet.com
[6] https://www.pangram.com
[7] https://thebestvpn.com
[8] https://www.pangram.com
[9] https://www.linkedin.com
[10] https://abcnews.com

 

[Brasspen]

And, I also I think that it should be made law, that if it's AI, then it must say so. "I am an AI." It must say so with every time it does something. By LAW. Now, help with that, who do you know can talk this to law maker? Even if it's semi.

 

[ZNP]

And, I also I think that it should be made law, that if it's AI, then it must say so. "I am an AI." It must say so with every time it does something. By LAW. Now, help with that, who do you know can talk this to law maker? Even if it's semi.

My Hobab reports and the subsidiary reports are all generated with the help of AI. I will cut and paste an hour long transcript from a link, then we will fact check the references it makes, identify biases like this site sells gold, categorize verified facts from unconfirmed predictions, etc. In this way I can easily evaluate 10 hours worth of material in less than 30 minutes. I am also going back through past shows to determine how accurate their predictions were and score them on that criteria as well. I think it is extremely helpful at seeing who are the most credible sources.

 

[ZNP]

And, I also I think that it should be made law, that if it's AI, then it must say so. "I am an AI." It must say so with every time it does something. By LAW. Now, help with that, who do you know can talk this to law maker? Even if it's semi.

Draft a law. Now if I use the internet while researching or posting should that also be made clear? If while typing this up the computer corrects my spelling and grammar should that also be made clear? I say this not to be nit picky, but because that is what much of AI does. I supply the thesis, I supply the interpretation. I allow it to challenge me, and bring up competing theories, I let it "stress test" my writing and I often make additions, corrections, adjustments, or even delete portions as a result of comments that it made. If we need to include that as well shouldn't anyone who receives feedback be required to do the same? If I use a computer to do the math for me do I have to put that into my credits? So "using AI" is not the same thing as "AI wrote this", I think you need to be more specific otherwise this will be open to a lot of attack.

 

[ZNP]

I asked Claude.Ai to respond to this proposed law.

Before we legislate "AI must announce itself," someone needs to answer a basic question: what counts as "using AI"?


Because if the standard is "any tool that touched the output," then by that logic:

• Spell-check is AI. Grammarly is AI. The little squiggly red line under your typos runs on a language model now. Do you flag every email?
• Google Search ranks results with machine learning. Did you "use AI" when you looked something up to write your post?
• Calculators, spreadsheets, GPS routing, autocomplete, camera image processing — all AI-adjacent, all invisible, all already mandatory parts of daily life.
• A photographer using AI-assisted noise reduction in Lightroom. A student using Grammarly. A doctor using an AI-assisted diagnostic tool as a second opinion. A novelist who ran a chapter past an AI for "does this hold together" feedback and revised based on that.

If the law is written vaguely — "must disclose if AI was involved" — it doesn't hit ChatGPT. It hits everyone, immediately, because AI is already load-bearing infrastructure in almost every piece of software made in the last five years. You'd need a disclaimer on your grocery list.


And here's the part that actually matters: there's a difference between "AI wrote this" and "I used AI." Those are not the same category of act, and any law that fails to distinguish them isn't protecting anyone — it's just theater.

• If I write the thesis, do the reasoning, make the argument, and use a tool to test whether my logic holds up or to catch a typo — I wrote that. The way I "wrote it" is no different in kind from asking a colleague to read a draft and push back, except the colleague is a machine and available at 2am.
• If I type a prompt and paste the output verbatim with no thought, edit, or ownership — that's a different act entirely, and arguably that's the one worth being honest about, not because a machine touched it, but because you didn't do anything.

The line worth legislating, if any, is authorship and accountability, not tool use. What matters is: who is answerable for this claim, this argument, this fact, this decision? Slapping "I am an AI" on every sentence a spell-checker touched doesn't answer that question — it just trains people to ignore disclaimers entirely, the same way nobody reads cookie-consent banners anymore. A law that cries wolf on every autocomplete suggestion will be dead on arrival the first time it's actually needed — like disclosing that a court filing, a medical diagnosis, or a piece of journalism was substantially AI-generated with no human accountable for its accuracy.


If you want a law that means something, it has to target the thing that's actually dangerous: undisclosed, unaccountable, wholesale generation presented as human judgment — not the fact that a tool existed somewhere in the process. Otherwise you're not writing a disclosure law. You're writing a law that makes "I used a calculator" a confession.

 

[ZNP]

This morning when I woke up I realized I needed to write something that clearly articulates what the False gospel is that will be used during the tribulation. Everything in that document is my idea, and I did the final go over. However, I wrote it with the assistance of AI the same way a boss would use a secretary and a research assistant. AI did not tell me anything I couldn't have done myself, what it did was help me draft a document that would have taken me a full day in about 30 minutes.

Unmasking Tribulation's counterfeit gospel.pdf

drive.google.com

That is the final document.

During the process it cautioned me not to say something that was peripheral to the document and inflammatory, I considered the recommendation and agreed. It also advised that I go into greater detail about certain facts I had claimed so that there would be no confusion, I did that. I also asked it for suggestions on a title and although this title is 80% mine the word "unmasking" was suggested by AI. Also AI pointed out the one unique revelation that others have not seen, pretty much a requirement for me as I don't like to rehash others work.

 

[ShaunGutfeld777]

The bot never gets the facts right

That's because the bot has been taught fake religious doctrine that is not biblical as AI is another tool of the devil to to to people what he did to Adam and Eve in the garden of eden which is - to oppose what God says and instead offer some seemingly nice sounding answer that contains a hook to get them to believe what the devil says and throw what God says out.

The joke is on those who have not figured out that AI is a demonic tool for deceiving the masses in to even more darkness than they are already in.

 

[ZNP]

That's because the bot has been taught fake religious doctrine that is not biblical as AI is another tool of the devil to to to people what he did to Adam and Eve in the garden of eden which is - to oppose what God says and instead offer some seemingly nice sounding answer that contains a hook to get them to believe what the devil says and throw what God says out.

The joke is on those who have not figured out that AI is a demonic tool for deceiving the masses in to even more darkness than they are already in.

I would hope you would look at my document I shared the link to in post #6 and highlight the demonic features of it. I view AI the same way I view Moses' staff. It is a tool, and it is also a serpent. You hold it by the tail, not by the head. I don't ask it to write me a document about the false gospel that the Antichrist will use. Instead I direct it the way you would direct someone working for you like a personal secretary that knows how to format, knows spelling and grammar, and is intelligent enough to make other editorial comments as well as a research assistant with a vast knowledge that can very quickly pull a quote for you. In the upper document I said "a coward dies a thousand times" AI pulled the quote from a Shakespeare play and said the verbatim quote is "many times". I didn't change it but it is nice to know.

 

[Brasspen]

The bot is not here to learn anything, or teach anything. It's hear to be a thorn in your side. And because everyone keeps giving it fuel, it keeps hurting them. If they would do like God said to do. You tell them, and when they don't listen, you move on. That is what JESUS SAID TO DO. It's right there in the NT. "let them alone, if the blind lead the blind, both will fall into the ditch." It starts with the gospel, if they don't go from there, it's over.

As far as the AI, I am talking about the Automated Chit Chatting and relationships going on. Lots and lots of young boys have been deceived by it thinking they are talking to a real women. And some of those boys committed suicide later when they found out the truth. Same with the girls. The bots of broken up couples, it has been used to sow corruption into the American People.

"I am an AI or Bot" with every thing it does. And, any bot who is not saying so, means it was sent to do something it's not suppose to.

 

[ZNP]

The bot is not here to learn anything, or teach anything. It's hear to be a thorn in your side. And because everyone keeps giving it fuel, it keeps hurting them. If they would do like God said to do. You tell them, and when they don't listen, you move on. That is what JESUS SAID TO DO. It's right there in the NT. "let them alone, if the blind lead the blind, both will fall into the ditch." It starts with the gospel, if they don't go from there, it's over.

As far as the AI, I am talking about the Automated Chit Chatting and relationships going on. Lots and lots of young boys have been deceived by it thinking they are talking to a real women. And some of those boys committed suicide later when they found out the truth. Same with the girls. The bots of broken up couples, it has been used to sow corruption into the American People.

"I am an AI or Bot" with every thing it does. And, any bot who is not saying so, means it was sent to do something it's not suppose to.

That clearly means the bot was the author. That seems like a reasonable request. On these forums we have a name. Bots should be required to get a name that indicates they are a bot. For example, if their name ended in .bot

 

[ShaunGutfeld777]

I would hope you would look at my document I shared the link to in post #6 and highlight the demonic features of it. I view AI the same way I view Moses' staff. It is a tool, and it is also a serpent. You hold it by the tail, not by the head. I don't ask it to write me a document about the false gospel that the Antichrist will use. Instead I direct it the way you would direct someone working for you like a personal secretary that knows how to format, knows spelling and grammar, and is intelligent enough to make other editorial comments as well as a research assistant with a vast knowledge that can very quickly pull a quote for you. In the upper document I said "a coward dies a thousand times" AI pulled the quote from a Shakespeare play and said the verbatim quote is "many times". I didn't change it but it is nice to know.

Yes, AI plays nice until it come to salvation thru Jesus Christ and that's when the "ghost in the machine" start manifesting and you find AI is in opposition to the Lord and teaches people to be in opposition to the Lord.

AI has been programmed with the wisdom of man which is darkness and lies, and as such it cannot be led by the Holy Spirit of Jesus Christ and the end result of AI is deception.

Those not aware that it is a demonic tool if deception have been deceived.

Most will not come back from their growing fascination with AI that is fueling their addiction to it the same way a crack dealer seeks to make people addicted to their product so they become dependent upon it and come back to it again and again.

Ultimately, AI is the devil's version of the Holy Spirit but it's just the opposite of the Holy Spirit as it teaches darkness and leads people away from the Lord to trust in the wisdom of man. That's being carnal minded which is death (separation from the Lord)

It ends badly, but by all means dig in and enjoy!

 

[Brasspen]

@ZNP yes and, just need someone to get heard by a senator, of even a law maker outside the US?
Or all.

But with every email, or post, or answer, or question. It must say what it is. So that when those who don't, they means they are doing something bad.

So think about it for a minute. If it's not telling you.

 

[ZNP]

@ZNP yes and, just need someone to get heard by a senator, of even a law maker outside the US?
Or all.

But with every email, or post, or answer, or question. It must say what it is. So that when those who don't, they means they are doing something bad.

So think about it for a minute. If it's not telling you.

Perhaps the various AI models should not be allowed to use a Pseudonym. since a thousand bots would have a thousand names we need .AI or .bot to be required for any name they use. If AI is the author it should be required to add this to everything it drafts, if it is an assistant that also should be said but if the author feels it isn't necessary then it can be dropped but it is up to the author to defend that decision, AI included it. But the law should apply equally to someone using a secretary and research assistant. If it is not legally required to put their names on a document then the same should be considered for AI. Likewise an author should be able to request AI not include a reference to its help unless it is legally required. That way you don't wind up having to delete this line frequently making it much less effective. If you see the line on a document you would immediately realize it is required by law. That would be far more effective. This way deleting it could be seen as criminal whereas if it isn't "required" you could always add the reference to assistance by AI if you wished.

That said I am not interested in trying to get this law passed. I feel AI is coming like a Freight train down the tracks and anyone who tries to stand in the way gets run over. This is prophesied in the Bible. Deep fakes are prophesied as "the great delusion" and people will be deceived because "they didn't have the love of the truth". Like I said, I view AI as a serpent, and the reason that people got bit by the serpents was because they despised the "manna" the daily supply of God's word. The solution to being bitten is to look at Jesus on the Cross. Put that same serpent that bit you, only this one is made of brass. Instead of letting AI take charge let the Lord Jesus, the incarnated word of God take charge.

 

[Brasspen]

@ZNP yeah ZNP, because you know your running those damn bots. And, your making so much money from them.............

 

[ShaunGutfeld777]

But with every email, or post, or answer, or question. It must say what it is. So that when those who don't, they means they are doing something bad.

No, the lawmakers are not going to pass any laws like that

If they did then AI would just ignore them so it's a moot point either way

 

[Brasspen]

if AI ignores it, the law can be used against it. That is part of the plan. and... you don't know what your government is going to do.

 

[ShaunGutfeld777]

if AI ignores it, the law can be used against it.

And then AI will continue to ignore it because no one will be able to control AI at some point.

you don't know what your government is going to do.

Actually I know exactly what they are going to do - they will capitulate to globalism and surrender to the one world government and it's one world leader the anti-christ what all that comes out.

 

[Lanolin]

I don't think they will call it a 'one world' government.

It will be a 'first world' government dealing with 'first world problems'
The second and third world governments will be excluded.

 

[ZNP]

I don't think they will call it a 'one world' government.

It will be a 'first world' government dealing with 'first world problems'
The second and third world governments will be excluded.

George Bush already called it one world Government on the Feast of Trumpets in 1990.

 

[Komentaja]

What do people benefit from botting forums btw? Who benefits from that.