47% of all internet traffic came from bots in 2022 (1 Viewer)

[BobbyLayne]

47% of all internet traffic came from bots in 2022

A new report reveals that in 2022, 47.4% of all internet traffic came from bots, a 5.1% increase over the previous year.

www.securitymagazine.com

A new report reveals that in 2022, 47.4% of all internet traffic came from bots, a 5.1% increase over the previous year. The same report showed that human traffic, at 52.6%, decreased to its lowest level in eight years.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

Total: 4 (members: 2, bot guests: 2)

 

[fatness]

A new report reveals that in 2022, 47.4% of all internet traffic came from bots, a 5.1% increase over the previous year. The same report showed that human traffic, at 52.6%, decreased to its lowest level in eight years.

Well this is an advance. We no longer have to waste time posting online and can have bots and AI do our posting for us, like online Roombas, leaving us more time to watch news stories and TV shows about threats to our existence discovered by bots and AI.

 

[FishTacoTuesday]

Draft.robot.likes.boobs.lol

 

[titusbramble]

Not read article but would imagine much of this would come from the likes of Google automatically scanning the web for pages?

 

[Long Ball Larry]

i am confused. The headline just says "bots" but the article mostly talks about "bad bots".

like titus said, it wouldn't surprise me at all to see a high % of bot traffic considering how much is automated these days, but if 47% is from "bad bots", that seems like a different issue.

 

[MTskibum]

i am confused. The headline just says "bots" but the article mostly talks about "bad bots".

like titus said, it wouldn't surprise me at all to see a high % of bot traffic considering how much is automated these days, but if 47% is from "bad bots", that seems like a different issue.

If you look at the graph below the data is from 2021 but the trend is clear bad bot traffic is nearly double that of good bot traffic, 27% bad 14% good in 2021.
@titusbramble

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1264226/human-and-bot-web-traffic-share/

 

[Jayrod]

Draft.robot.likes.boobs.lol

Forgot about him. Always found that account funny in a juvenile way.

 

[Sand]

47% of all internet traffic came from bots in 2022

A new report reveals that in 2022, 47.4% of all internet traffic came from bots, a 5.1% increase over the previous year.

www.securitymagazine.com

A new report reveals that in 2022, 47.4% of all internet traffic came from bots, a 5.1% increase over the previous year. The same report showed that human traffic, at 52.6%, decreased to its lowest level in eight years.

And to think that's down 2 points from what it could have been due to "Tim" not being able to post in the Politics Forum.

 

[Hastur]

It is getting exponentially worse

 

[Ilov80s]

It is getting exponentially worse

It's crazy how quickly Twitter went from having organic conversations in the replies to bot only responses. One of things that ruined the site. The only reason Twitter is "doing well" right now is the same reason Facebook is. It already has a lot of users- people are there so it's easier just to stay there then to find someplace new. But if Twitter/X was a new entity right now, it would be a total failure. It’s just an AI/bot nightmare.

 

[Gatorade]

How do you tell a bad bot from a good bot ?
And who decides of they are good/bad ?

 

[The Gator]

THat's early FFA @mr. furley levels of effort.

 

[Runkle]

It is getting exponentially worse

IMHO, Facebook killed the original, independent internet. Instead of everyone having their own unique sites and individual blogs and self-created pages, there was a land-rush into the facebook ecosystem that destroyed the kind of distinctiveness the old internet had. Everything became the same, looked the same, felt the same, and had that veneer of corporate optimization and monetization that's carried over to today. Even now that people are moving off of facebook, they're not self-hosting and striking out on their own, but, moving into other alternative walled gardens tended by other corporations, and putting up the same types of soul-less cookie-cutter content that reinforce the dead internet.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Interesting as I'm way more optimistic than it seems many here are.

Yes, X has bots. But my experience there is not hindered by them at all. I get a few sportsbook ads / bots that post replies to posts I make and X hides them saying they may be spam or offensive. Works great. And for the real people I follow on X along with the lists I've created, bots have zero impact. So X / Twitter works for me the exact same incredibly useful way it has the last 10 years.

As for the "original independent" internet that people claim is now dead, I'm not sure what you mean. Individual authors have more ways to create and distribute content than ever before.

In 2000, we had to hack together a way to email our newsletter. Now there are a bunch of companies who help content creators make and distribute newsletters at scale. We send out an email to 700,000 people every day.

Sites like Substack are soaring because it's an easy and intuitive way for people to create content and share.

For video and audio, the amount of quality content is staggering. And it's never been easier for a creator to put quality content into the world. Of course, with a low barrier to entry, there is more low quality content also. But the market rules there. Good work is rewarded. It's never been easier to be heard or seen.

And sites like this forum continue to provide a place for sharing ideas and discussion and community. Yes, there occasionally is a bot that posts something obviously botlike but you folks do a great job reporting those and they're quickly marked as spammers and removed. We get maybe 1-2 a week of those.

I'm admittedly an optimist, but it seems easy for me to see things as better than ever for both creating and consuming content online.

 

[Buckna]

It is getting exponentially worse

IMHO, Facebook killed the original, independent internet. Instead of everyone having their own unique sites and individual blogs and self-created pages, there was a land-rush into the facebook ecosystem that destroyed the kind of distinctiveness the old internet had. Everything became the same, looked the same, felt the same, and had that veneer of corporate optimization and monetization that's carried over to today. Even now that people are moving off of facebook, they're not self-hosting and striking out on their own, but, moving into other alternative walled gardens tended by other corporations, and putting up the same types of soul-less cookie-cutter content that reinforce the dead internet.

Monetization of search algorithms didn't help. Used to be you'd Google something and find multiple informative links often to people's expert pages. For many years now it's 70% ads, 20% click bait or now its these AI proceedurely generated useless topic pages covered in ads and links you have to scroll way down to find any info and if you're lucky maybe 5-10% actual useful info.

 

[GroveDiesel]

Interesting as I'm way more optimistic than it seems many here are.

Yes, X has bots. But my experience there is not hindered by them at all. I get a few sportsbook ads / bots that post replies to posts I make and X hides them saying they may be spam or offensive. Works great. And for the real people I follow on X along with the lists I've created, bots have zero impact. So X / Twitter works for me the exact same incredibly useful way it has the last 10 years.

As for the "original independent" internet that people claim is now dead, I'm not sure what you mean. Individual authors have more ways to create and distribute content than ever before.

In 2000, we had to hack together a way to email our newsletter. Now there are a bunch of companies who help content creators make and distribute newsletters at scale. We send out an email to 700,000 people every day.

Sites like Substack are soaring because it's an easy and intuitive way for people to create content and share.

For video and audio, the amount of quality content is staggering. And it's never been easier for a creator to put quality content into the world. Of course, with a low barrier to entry, there is more low quality content also. But the market rules there. Good work is rewarded. It's never been easier to be heard or seen.

And sites like this forum continue to provide a place for sharing ideas and discussion and community. Yes, there occasionally is a bot that posts something obviously botlike but you folks do a great job reporting those and they're quickly marked as spammers and removed. We get maybe 1-2 a week of those.

I'm admittedly an optimist, but it seems easy for me to see things as better than ever for both creating and consuming content online.

Do you think that your experience as an established and top of your market content producer may differ from emerging/not established content producers or consumers?

I’m wondering if your position and your networking/outreach with those in your industry gives you a leg up on discerning what is valuable and what is low quality/bot content versus what the average consumer experiences. You’re meeting with folks at industry events, hiring writers, scoping out the competition, meeting NFL writers, etc. Whereas someone newer to fantasy football has no idea how to find quality content.

I know to trust FBG and FBG writers, but someone new might just be getting the big aggregators like Dov Kleiman and MLFootball fed to them and end up with really poor quality information. And frankly, those big low quality aggregators are doing a much better job getting visibility on social media platforms than you are. A lot of that is through using bot networks and manipulation and they’re not even creating their own content.

My $0.02: As a consumer, it’s increasingly difficult to find and vet quality information sources that I can trust. I’ve been able to do it and curate a pretty decent follow list that serves me well. But I’m also highly discerning and, IMO, naturally good at being able to judge source reliability. I don’t think that’s generally true for most people.

 

[SWC]

47% of all internet traffic came from bots in 2022

A new report reveals that in 2022, 47.4% of all internet traffic came from bots, a 5.1% increase over the previous year.

www.securitymagazine.com

A new report reveals that in 2022, 47.4% of all internet traffic came from bots, a 5.1% increase over the previous year. The same report showed that human traffic, at 52.6%, decreased to its lowest level in eight years.

And to think that's down 2 points from what it could have been due to "Tim" not being able to post in the Politics Forum.

hes been making it up by posting horrible movie ranking threads that leave out smokey and the brohandit take that to the bank

 

[GroveDiesel]

It is getting exponentially worse

IMHO, Facebook killed the original, independent internet. Instead of everyone having their own unique sites and individual blogs and self-created pages, there was a land-rush into the facebook ecosystem that destroyed the kind of distinctiveness the old internet had. Everything became the same, looked the same, felt the same, and had that veneer of corporate optimization and monetization that's carried over to today. Even now that people are moving off of facebook, they're not self-hosting and striking out on their own, but, moving into other alternative walled gardens tended by other corporations, and putting up the same types of soul-less cookie-cutter content that reinforce the dead internet.

Monetization of search algorithms didn't help. Used to be you'd Google something and find multiple informative links often to people's expert pages. For many years now it's 70% ads, 20% click bait or now its these AI proceedurely generated useless topic pages covered in ads and links you have to scroll way down to find any info and if you're lucky maybe 5-10% actual useful info.

Google has been totally co-opted by garbage SEO content and they have shown little interest in putting effort into providing better search results instead of increasing advertising. It’s very frustrating.

Example: If I search “fantasy football content” on Google, Footballguys doesn’t show up until result 17 on mobile (and that’s condensing all the Reddit results to 1 result).

If I search “fantasy football” Football guys has 2 results in the top 100. None in the top 25. Both of which are to individual forum posts and none to the main site despite FBG being arguably the #1 fantasy football content producer.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

It is getting exponentially worse

IMHO, Facebook killed the original, independent internet. Instead of everyone having their own unique sites and individual blogs and self-created pages, there was a land-rush into the facebook ecosystem that destroyed the kind of distinctiveness the old internet had. Everything became the same, looked the same, felt the same, and had that veneer of corporate optimization and monetization that's carried over to today. Even now that people are moving off of facebook, they're not self-hosting and striking out on their own, but, moving into other alternative walled gardens tended by other corporations, and putting up the same types of soul-less cookie-cutter content that reinforce the dead internet.

Monetization of search algorithms didn't help. Used to be you'd Google something and find multiple informative links often to people's expert pages. For many years now it's 70% ads, 20% click bait or now its these AI proceedurely generated useless topic pages covered in ads and links you have to scroll way down to find any info and if you're lucky maybe 5-10% actual useful info.

I don't think I will ever not be grateful and awe-struck by the internet. It's weird now to think about how we used to have to go to the library if we wanted to find a book about a particular topic. And if something happened, you'd have until wait until the next day's paper to read about it, or maybe wait a few more days for US News & World Report to do a deep dive into that story. You had to watch television on somebody else's schedule, you were dependent on Blockbuster for movies, Gamestop for games, malls for shopping, etc. You had to look at paper maps to navigate around. The modern internet dramatically improved on all those things. It's great.

But one area where I think we have a valid complaint is Google. If the internet is a giant library, it's like Google dumped the card catalog all over the floor and refiled everything at random. I understand why, but it seems like this should be a solvable problem.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Interesting as I'm way more optimistic than it seems many here are.

Yes, X has bots. But my experience there is not hindered by them at all. I get a few sportsbook ads / bots that post replies to posts I make and X hides them saying they may be spam or offensive. Works great. And for the real people I follow on X along with the lists I've created, bots have zero impact. So X / Twitter works for me the exact same incredibly useful way it has the last 10 years.

As for the "original independent" internet that people claim is now dead, I'm not sure what you mean. Individual authors have more ways to create and distribute content than ever before.

In 2000, we had to hack together a way to email our newsletter. Now there are a bunch of companies who help content creators make and distribute newsletters at scale. We send out an email to 700,000 people every day.

Sites like Substack are soaring because it's an easy and intuitive way for people to create content and share.

For video and audio, the amount of quality content is staggering. And it's never been easier for a creator to put quality content into the world. Of course, with a low barrier to entry, there is more low quality content also. But the market rules there. Good work is rewarded. It's never been easier to be heard or seen.

And sites like this forum continue to provide a place for sharing ideas and discussion and community. Yes, there occasionally is a bot that posts something obviously botlike but you folks do a great job reporting those and they're quickly marked as spammers and removed. We get maybe 1-2 a week of those.

I'm admittedly an optimist, but it seems easy for me to see things as better than ever for both creating and consuming content online.

Do you think that your experience as an established and top of your market content producer may differ from emerging/not established content producers or consumers?

I’m wondering if your position and your networking/outreach with those in your industry gives you a leg up on discerning what is valuable and what is low quality/bot content versus what the average consumer experiences. You’re meeting with folks at industry events, hiring writers, scoping out the competition, meeting NFL writers, etc. Whereas someone newer to fantasy football has no idea how to find quality content.

I know to trust FBG and FBG writers, but someone new might just be getting the big aggregators like Dov Kleiman and MLFootball fed to them and end up with really poor quality information. And frankly, those big low quality aggregators are doing a much better job getting visibility on social media platforms than you are. A lot of that is through using bot networks and manipulation and they’re not even creating their own content.

My $0.02: As a consumer, it’s increasingly difficult to find and vet quality information sources that I can trust. I’ve been able to do it and curate a pretty decent follow list that serves me well. But I’m also highly discerning and, IMO, naturally good at being able to judge source reliability. I don’t think that’s generally true for most people.

That's a good question.

From the content creator side, I'm not sure our long time in the industry helps much. In many ways, we are the old school now. And new creators that are willing to grind and hustle have a huge opportunity. There are so many more platforms available now compared to what we had. Some may remember the old rec.sports usenet forums. For many of us, that was it. Now there are tons of quality platforms to get your work out.

From the consumer, noise can be challenging. It's tough to know which of the many podcasts you want. Or which accounts to follow on X. But it seems like a lot of that self selects and sorts itself.

So for me, I think there's never been a better time in history to create and consume content online. It's bonkers how much great content is out there in my opinion.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I don't think I will ever not be grateful and awe-struck by the internet. It's weird now to think about how we used to have to go to the library if we wanted to find a book about a particular topic. And if something happened, you'd have until wait until the next day's paper to read about it, or maybe wait a few more days for US News & World Report to do a deep dive into that story. You had to watch television on somebody else's schedule, you were dependent on Blockbuster for movies, Gamestop for games, malls for shopping, etc. You had to look at paper maps to navigate around. The modern internet dramatically improved on all those things. It's great.

Same.

I try to default toward gratitude but even if I didn't, what we have now is just so crazy good it's hard to fathom.

It's a little like the discussion here with people talking about terrible Red Zone was. Thinking about having to wait until Monday Night football halftime to see Sunday highlights for the FIRST TIME, the fact one can watch key highlights from 8 games at one time seems like a miracle.

I feel the same about the internet and don't get it when people bemoan the problems of the internet. I have a set of World Book Encyclopedias I keep just to remind me of how grateful I should be. And sure, it's a tool and resource like any other tool or resource. How you use it determines the value of it. But it just seems incredible to me.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

I don't think I will ever not be grateful and awe-struck by the internet. It's weird now to think about how we used to have to go to the library if we wanted to find a book about a particular topic. And if something happened, you'd have until wait until the next day's paper to read about it, or maybe wait a few more days for US News & World Report to do a deep dive into that story. You had to watch television on somebody else's schedule, you were dependent on Blockbuster for movies, Gamestop for games, malls for shopping, etc. You had to look at paper maps to navigate around. The modern internet dramatically improved on all those things. It's great.

Same.

I try to default toward gratitude but even if I didn't, what we have now is just so crazy good it's hard to fathom.

It's a little like the discussion here with people talking about terrible Red Zone was. Thinking about having to wait until Monday Night football halftime to see Sunday highlights for the FIRST TIME, the fact one can watch key highlights from 8 games at one time seems like a miracle.

I feel the same about the internet and don't get it when people bemoan the problems of the internet. I have a set of World Book Encyclopedias I keep just to remind me of how grateful I should be. And sure, it's a tool and resource like any other tool or resource. How you use it determines the value of it. But it just seems incredible to me.

Everything is amazing and nobody is happy

 

[SWC]

maybe i am a bot and i dont even know it take that to the botbank domo arigato mr broboto

 

[Ilov80s]

This is good fodder for the dead internet crowd

Essentially meta is putting fake ai generated profiles on FB and IG now