Perhaps it will destroy anonymity. Because the only way to be sure a human wrote something is if you somehow know who the comment came from.

We might end up with reputation based conversations.

Of course, the human can simply lend their name to the robot. And as previously discussed, ending anonymity entrenches the existing power structure.

> Of course, the human can simply lend their name to the robot.

That could have consequences for their reputation, though.

Are you suggesting that people found to have misled the public should be .. cancelled?

(Reputation is a lot more controversial and complicated than it sounds)

You can still be anonymous with this. You just need to be pseudonymous.

Robots can also have a pseudonym.

Go to URL and tell me what is written there.

It's more insidious than that. You can think you've convinced a human whereas you've just spent your energy on a bot. Assuming "political arguments on social media" has any relevance to voted cast, that's a vote for your side which doesn't happen.

> Seriously, once this is weaponised, discussion of politics on the internet with strangers becomes completely pointless

Quite the opposite, I suspect.

Eventually, to engage in the most persuasive conversations, the AIs will develop a real-time learning mode.

Once that is weaponised, the AIs will be on track to be in charge of running things, or at least greatly influencing how things are run.

What the AIs "think" will matter, if only because people will be listening to them.

Then it will be really important to discuss politics with the AIs.

Could you potentially convince a human for politics issue? It is extremely hard to convince stranger in the forum when there are some priors in mind.