Not the first time something like that happened, and everyone always buys into it, because no one actually reads studies.

I see the web fracturing into a gigantic swamp of corporate AI slop and a tiny pool of the indie web.

I believe the current meta of SEO is seeing how far you can get prompt injecting your site into AI summaries via llms.txt. So... that's cool too.

I've been getting spammed to use these services... They didn't even bother to check if I still work at the company in question they want to promote.

NG SEO.

Citing Star Trek, LotR and Friends as sources should also have been a clue.

I do wonder whether the studies that cited theirs were actually AI generated themselves….

so basically you were training people how to code

I’ve come to appreciate this approach in the cybersecurity world. CVE exploits and proof-of-concepts from experienced authors get included in tools like Metasploit. Individual authors will intentionally do something like put subtle syntax errors or “forget” necessary include statements so something won’t compile or link correctly. Just enough to deter script kiddies but not enough to phase a seasoned tester or experienced developer.