Connect with us

Business

AI slop recipes are taking over the internet — and Thanksgiving dinner

Published

on



Eb Gargano has been writing recipes online long enough to anticipate the seasonal rhythms of her web traffic. The Easy Peasy Foodie creator can predict when US readers begin searching for her stress-free turkey instructions, or when her Christmas cake will start its annual climb up Google search results.

This year, those familiar patterns are breaking. Instead of sending home cooks to her decade-old, well-tested recipes, Google increasingly inserts AI-generated summaries stitched together from bits of her work and others’ that often get the basics wrong. An AI-assembled version of Gargano’s Christmas cake, for instance, would have people cooking a 6-inch cake for 3 to 4 hours at 320°F (160°C).

“You’d end up with charcoal!” she said. Meanwhile, traffic to her turkey recipe is already down 40% year over year.

Recipe bloggers like Gargano said it’s the first holiday season where consumers are starting to trust AI answers in search and chatbots, as well as recipe content remixed by AI, which can be hard to distinguish from the real thing. That’s not just bad for business; it’s potentially ruinous for a holiday dinner table if home cooks, inspired by pretty AI-generated photos, try recipes that turn out unappetizing or that defy the laws of chemistry.  In interviews, 22 independent food creators said that AI-generated “recipe slop” is distorting nearly every way people find cooking advice online, damaging their businesses while causing consumers to waste time and money.

Across the internet, writers say their vetted recipes are hidden by the flood. Pinterest feeds are stuffed with AI-generated images of food that the attached instructions won’t achieve; Google’s AI Overviews surface error-filled cooking steps that siphon away clicks from professionals. Meanwhile, Facebook content farms use AI-generated images of supposedly delicious but impossible dishes to the top of people’s feeds, in an attempt to turn any clicks into ad revenue.

All of this, food bloggers say, erodes the simple promise of a recipe: that someone has actually cooked it before you have. To Gargano, this is the core issue. “No matter how clever the AI is,” she said in a recent interview, “it can never actually test a recipe in a real kitchen and see how it works.”

Food blog traffic can vary wildly by niche, platform, audience and even season. But AI slop is everywhere. Yvette Marquez-Sharpnack, the 15-year author of the Mexican food blog Muy Bueno, recently warned her more than 190,000 Facebook followers. Earlier this month, she posted two AI-generated tamale photos: one with sauce poured over the husks, and another showing tamales lying flat in a steamer. Both, she wrote, were obvious mistakes.

The husks aren’t meant to be eaten; you remove them before adding sauce. And tamales should steam upright so the masa cooks evenly. “Little details like this are big red flags,” she told readers. “When you search for recipes, make sure they come from trusted human cooks who actually test their food.”

The issue hit home last Christmas when her husband wanted to try a recipe on Facebook for maraschino cherry chocolate chip cookies — from a post that didn’t seem to have a human author or source. Marquez-Sharpnack said she was suspicious of the photos, in which the cookies were a little too perfectly pink. But her husband trusted the post because “it was on Facebook.” The result was a melted sheet of dough with a cloyingly sweet flavor. “A disaster,” she said.

Meanwhile, Marquez-Sharpnack has seen her own photos reused without permission on Facebook, Pinterest, and even Etsy, where one seller included her recipes in a digital cookbook. With most of her traffic still coming from Google, she now urges readers to verify what they click: check URLs, look for real “about” pages, and be wary of impossible or overly glossy images.

Etsy  Inc. and Facebook owner Meta Platforms Inc. didn’t respond to requests for comment. Pinterest Inc.  said creators’ traffic can fluctuate for many reasons and emphasized that its generative-AI tools are meant to supplement, not replace, human creativity.

In a statement, Google said that “AI Overviews are often a helpful starting point to learn about a dish, but we see that people still want to go and read original recipes from creators. We’re focused on making it easy for people to discover and visit useful sites that have a good user experience.”

For Carrie Forrest, who runs Clean Eating Kitchen, AI has been devastating: 80% of her traffic — and her revenue — has disappeared in two years. Although the views started dropping when OpenAI’s ChatGPT was released, it wasn’t until Google launched AI Mode in search that her traffic collapsed, she said. Since then, she’s gone from employing about ten people to letting everyone go. “I’m going to have to find something else to do.”

This holiday season is on track to be Forrest’s slowest in years. She fears that if more content creators give up, the AI won’t have new content to draw from, except content generated by AI. It may get to a point where “AI is just talking to itself,” and home cooks are gambling with the results, she said. 

Internet users may be drawn to easy, quick AI answers as an alternative to web pages in part because food bloggers often include personal essays — sometimes running to many paragraphs — on their pages, meaning readers must scroll before reaching a recipe at the bottom. That’s a phenomenon that also came about because of Google: longer content historically allowed higher ranking in search results and more space for ads.

The food bloggers said Google still delivers the bulk of their traffic, but the once-steady source now comes with unpredictable fluctuations they struggle to understand or plan around. They’re also affecting how food knowledge moves around the internet at a basic level.

When searching on Google for Chinese cooking traditions, a casual cook may be satisfied by the AI Overview. But that may draw from The Woks of Life blog, a comprehensive English-language resource for Chinese cooking, according to Sarah Leung, one of its co-creators. Her family has spent years building out reference material on techniques, traditions and culture, she said. “AI summaries have almost completely overtaken results about various Chinese ingredients, many of which had no information online in English before individual creators like us wrote about them.”

The shift has her questioning whether it’s worth publishing new reference guides at all. “In all likelihood, no one will ever discover those pages,” she said.

Even their cooking videos — the main way the family teaches Chinese techniques — are often scraped and summarized by Google’s AI Overviews. In one instance, Google prominently credited their work, but Leung said the larger issue remains: “How many people will actually click through to watch?” For Leung, the rise of AI feels less like a new discovery tool and more like a force flattening the very sources it depends on, leaving the creators who built that knowledge increasingly invisible.

Often, the material in AI answers comes from more than one source at the same time, leading to issues with accuracy and attribution. Adam Gallagher, who has run Inspired Taste since 2009, calls them “Frankenstein AI recipes.” Google’s AI takes Inspired Taste’s ingredients and combines them with instructions from other popular food blogs, then presents the mash-up as the answer above his own link — even when people search for his brand by name. His internal data showed that when AI Overviews began showing for queries on cocktails from Inspired Taste, click-through rates to his site were down 30%.

In November, Google debuted an updated version of its artificial intelligence model that executives said represented a “massive jump” in reasoning and coding ability. The new model, Gemini 3, was immediately available across all of Google’s major products, including search, and could answer questions with interactive graphics.

But for Gallagher, the announcement set off alarm bells. After trying out the new Gemini 3-powered Google Search, he found that the interactive graphics output was actually “mashing together our photos along with other publishers’ in their plagiarized AI recipes.”

“With this development, we are now going to have to start to let our followers and readers know what is going on so that they don’t follow these Google recipes,”  Gallagher said.

Across the Atlantic, Marita Sinden, founder of MyDinner, has spent more than a decade sharing authentic German recipes with an international audience. Like other bloggers, she’s seen sharp declines in visibility: Google traffic down 30% this year, Pinterest down 50%. 

But in her view, one of the most dramatic shifts is happening on Facebook, where algorithmic ranking routinely pushes exciting AI-generated food images above posts from real cooks. Many of her followers are older, of the generation especially vulnerable to the images of impossible-looking dishes that spread on the platform. She’s even seen tutorial videos that advise specifically on how to target elderly Facebook users with AI images.

But even if Facebook users take the extra step to verify that the source of the information is real, they may find themselves on an AI-generated website. Some creators say AI systems are now being used to clone their library of work — lifting their photos, rewriting their recipes, and republishing the results as new “original” work. At least four bloggers told Bloomberg they’ve discovered AI-generated replicas of their recipes circulating under different domains, with the instructions lightly rephrased and the photos subtly altered by AI. Because the content isn’t an exact copy, traditional takedown tools like DMCA aren’t straightforward, leaving creators with almost no remedy even when the imitation is obvious.

That’s what happened to Bjork Ostrom, co-founder of the long-running food site Pinch of Yum. He recently discovered what appeared to be an AI-generated mirror of his entire website — a German-language version populated with AI-altered copies of his food photos and synthetic, subtly distorted images of his wife and young children. 

“It was unsettling,” he said, describing the shock of scrolling through uncanny photos of his family on a site he had no connection to. The site makes it seem like the content is coming from a human, even though the recipes can no longer be trusted. 

Sometimes, copied recipes can outperform the originals. Coley Gaffney, a professionally trained chef who runs the blog Coley Cooks, said Pinterest has become “notoriously filled with AI slop,” with searches for her most popular dishes now dominated by machine-generated copies. One AI-run site is now capturing  the top pin for a search that previously reliably sent readers to her — using a recipe that she wrote. 

For The Food Blog, run by Colleen Milne, there’s been an even more dramatic erosion of referral traffic. Pinterest had long been Milne’s second-largest traffic source after Google, accounting for about a quarter of her overall readers. But she said that figure has been cut by more than half over the past year, falling from roughly 25% to just 11%. Her Pinterest monthly views, once around 1.3 million, dropped to 419,000 and continue to decline. “I have seen several of my recipes and photos copied by AI on Pinterest,” she said. “Pinterest has a ‘report pin’ button, but there’s no option for reporting AI copying.” 

Pinterest’s own recommendation emails used to surface seasonal dishes from human creators, but now increasingly suggest AI-generated meals, according to Stacie Vaughan, who runs Simply Stacie, where she focuses on family-friendly meals. “It’s frustrating to see how much space this kind of content is taking up, especially during what used to be one of the busiest times of the year for food bloggers,” she said. 

Pinterest said its AI-driven recommendations help connect creators with audiences and make high-quality content more discoverable, including food content. The company added that it offers user controls and labels for generative AI content, uses new detection models to flag AI-generated images even without metadata, and enforces both its community guidelines and its generative AI acceptable use guidelines for all AI-created material on the platform.

After months of watching platforms shift under their feet, many bloggers say they’re entering the holiday season with a mix of anxiety and resignation. As Pinch of Yum’s Ostrom put it, “this inevitably is the most, I think, existential point for us as business owners who create content on the internet” — a change not just in where content appears, but “how the content is being created.” 



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Netflix–Warner Bros. deal sets up $72 billion antitrust test

Published

on



Netflix Inc. has won the heated takeover battle for Warner Bros. Discovery Inc. Now it must convince global antitrust regulators that the deal won’t give it an illegal advantage in the streaming market. 

The $72 billion tie-up joins the world’s dominant paid streaming service with one of Hollywood’s most iconic movie studios. It would reshape the market for online video content by combining the No. 1 streaming player with the No. 4 service HBO Max and its blockbuster hits such as Game Of ThronesFriends, and the DC Universe comics characters franchise.  

That could raise red flags for global antitrust regulators over concerns that Netflix would have too much control over the streaming market. The company faces a lengthy Justice Department review and a possible US lawsuit seeking to block the deal if it doesn’t adopt some remedies to get it cleared, analysts said.

“Netflix will have an uphill climb unless it agrees to divest HBO Max as well as additional behavioral commitments — particularly on licensing content,” said Bloomberg Intelligence analyst Jennifer Rie. “The streaming overlap is significant,” she added, saying the argument that “the market should be viewed more broadly is a tough one to win.”

By choosing Netflix, Warner Bros. has jilted another bidder, Paramount Skydance Corp., a move that risks touching off a political battle in Washington. Paramount is backed by the world’s second-richest man, Larry Ellison, and his son, David Ellison, and the company has touted their longstanding close ties to President Donald Trump. Their acquisition of Paramount, which closed in August, has won public praise from Trump. 

Comcast Corp. also made a bid for Warner Bros., looking to merge it with its NBCUniversal division.

The Justice Department’s antitrust division, which would review the transaction in the US, could argue that the deal is illegal on its face because the combined market share would put Netflix well over a 30% threshold.

The White House, the Justice Department and Comcast didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment. 

US lawmakers from both parties, including Republican Representative Darrell Issa and Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren have already faulted the transaction — which would create a global streaming giant with 450 million users — as harmful to consumers.

“This deal looks like an anti-monopoly nightmare,” Warren said after the Netflix announcement. Utah Senator Mike Lee, a Republican, said in a social media post earlier this week that a Warner Bros.-Netflix tie-up would raise more serious competition questions “than any transaction I’ve seen in about a decade.”

European Union regulators are also likely to subject the Netflix proposal to an intensive review amid pressure from legislators. In the UK, the deal has already drawn scrutiny before the announcement, with House of Lords member Baroness Luciana Berger pressing the government on how the transaction would impact competition and consumer prices.

The combined company could raise prices and broadly impact “culture, film, cinemas and theater releases,”said Andreas Schwab, a leading member of the European Parliament on competition issues, after the announcement.

Paramount has sought to frame the Netflix deal as a non-starter. “The simple truth is that a deal with Netflix as the buyer likely will never close, due to antitrust and regulatory challenges in the United States and in most jurisdictions abroad,” Paramount’s antitrust lawyers wrote to their counterparts at Warner Bros. on Dec. 1.

Appealing directly to Trump could help Netflix avoid intense antitrust scrutiny, New Street Research’s Blair Levin wrote in a note on Friday. Levin said it’s possible that Trump could come to see the benefit of switching from a pro-Paramount position to a pro-Netflix position. “And if he does so, we believe the DOJ will follow suit,” Levin wrote.

Netflix co-Chief Executive Officer Ted Sarandos had dinner with Trump at the president’s Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida last December, a move other CEOs made after the election in order to win over the administration. In a call with investors Friday morning, Sarandos said that he’s “highly confident in the regulatory process,” contending the deal favors consumers, workers and innovation. 

“Our plans here are to work really closely with all the appropriate governments and regulators, but really confident that we’re going to get all the necessary approvals that we need,” he said.

Netflix will likely argue to regulators that other video services such as Google’s YouTube and ByteDance Ltd.’s TikTok should be included in any analysis of the market, which would dramatically shrink the company’s perceived dominance.

The US Federal Communications Commission, which regulates the transfer of broadcast-TV licenses, isn’t expected to play a role in the deal, as neither hold such licenses. Warner Bros. plans to spin off its cable TV division, which includes channels such as CNN, TBS and TNT, before the sale.

Even if antitrust reviews just focus on streaming, Netflix believes it will ultimately prevail, pointing to Amazon.com Inc.’s Prime and Walt Disney Co. as other major competitors, according to people familiar with the company’s thinking. 

Netflix is expected to argue that more than 75% of HBO Max subscribers already subscribe to Netflix, making them complementary offerings rather than competitors, said the people, who asked not to be named discussing confidential deliberations. The company is expected to make the case that reducing its content costs through owning Warner Bros., eliminating redundant back-end technology and bundling Netflix with Max will yield lower prices.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

The rise of AI reasoning models comes with a big energy tradeoff

Published

on



Nearly all leading artificial intelligence developers are focused on building AI models that mimic the way humans reason, but new research shows these cutting-edge systems can be far more energy intensive, adding to concerns about AI’s strain on power grids.

AI reasoning models used 30 times more power on average to respond to 1,000 written prompts than alternatives without this reasoning capability or which had it disabled, according to a study released Thursday. The work was carried out by the AI Energy Score project, led by Hugging Face research scientist Sasha Luccioni and Salesforce Inc. head of AI sustainability Boris Gamazaychikov.

The researchers evaluated 40 open, freely available AI models, including software from OpenAI, Alphabet Inc.’s Google and Microsoft Corp. Some models were found to have a much wider disparity in energy consumption, including one from Chinese upstart DeepSeek. A slimmed-down version of DeepSeek’s R1 model used just 50 watt hours to respond to the prompts when reasoning was turned off, or about as much power as is needed to run a 50 watt lightbulb for an hour. With the reasoning feature enabled, the same model required 7,626 watt hours to complete the tasks.

The soaring energy needs of AI have increasingly come under scrutiny. As tech companies race to build more and bigger data centers to support AI, industry watchers have raised concerns about straining power grids and raising energy costs for consumers. A Bloomberg investigation in September found that wholesale electricity prices rose as much as 267% over the past five years in areas near data centers. There are also environmental drawbacks, as Microsoft, Google and Amazon.com Inc. have previously acknowledged the data center buildout could complicate their long-term climate objectives

More than a year ago, OpenAI released its first reasoning model, called o1. Where its prior software replied almost instantly to queries, o1 spent more time computing an answer before responding. Many other AI companies have since released similar systems, with the goal of solving more complex multistep problems for fields like science, math and coding.

Though reasoning systems have quickly become the industry norm for carrying out more complicated tasks, there has been little research into their energy demands. Much of the increase in power consumption is due to reasoning models generating much more text when responding, the researchers said. 

The new report aims to better understand how AI energy needs are evolving, Luccioni said. She also hopes it helps people better understand that there are different types of AI models suited to different actions. Not every query requires tapping the most computationally intensive AI reasoning systems.

“We should be smarter about the way that we use AI,” Luccioni said. “Choosing the right model for the right task is important.”

To test the difference in power use, the researchers ran all the models on the same computer hardware. They used the same prompts for each, ranging from simple questions — such as asking which team won the Super Bowl in a particular year — to more complex math problems. They also used a software tool called CodeCarbon to track how much energy was being consumed in real time.

The results varied considerably. The researchers found one of Microsoft’s Phi 4 reasoning models used 9,462 watt hours with reasoning turned on, compared with about 18 watt hours with it off. OpenAI’s largest gpt-oss model, meanwhile, had a less stark difference. It used 8,504 watt hours with reasoning on the most computationally intensive “high” setting and 5,313 watt hours with the setting turned down to “low.” 

OpenAI, Microsoft, Google and DeepSeek did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Google released internal research in August that estimated the median text prompt for its Gemini AI service used 0.24 watt-hours of energy, roughly equal to watching TV for less than nine seconds. Google said that figure was “substantially lower than many public estimates.” 

Much of the discussion about AI power consumption has focused on large-scale facilities set up to train artificial intelligence systems. Increasingly, however, tech firms are shifting more resources to inference, or the process of running AI systems after they’ve been trained. The push toward reasoning models is a big piece of that as these systems are more reliant on inference.

Recently, some tech leaders have acknowledged that AI’s power draw needs to be reckoned with. Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella said the industry must earn the “social permission to consume energy” for AI data centers in a November interview. To do that, he argued tech must use AI to do good and foster broad economic growth.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

SpaceX to offer insider shares at record-setting valuation

Published

on



SpaceX is preparing to sell insider shares in a transaction that would value Elon Musk’s rocket and satellite maker at a valuation higher than OpenAI’s record-setting $500 billion, people familiar with the matter said.

One of the people briefed on the deal said that the share price under discussion is higher than $400 apiece, which would value SpaceX at between $750 billion and $800 billion, though the details could change. 

The company’s latest tender offer was discussed by its board of directors on Thursday at SpaceX’s Starbase hub in Texas. If confirmed, it would make SpaceX once again the world’s most valuable closely held company, vaulting past the previous record of $500 billion that ChatGPT owner OpenAI set in October. Play Video

Preliminary scenarios included per-share prices that would have pushed SpaceX’s value at roughly $560 billion or higher, the people said. The details of the deal could change before it closes, a third person said. 

A representative for SpaceX didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment. 

The latest figure would be a substantial increase from the $212 a share set in July, when the company raised money and sold shares at a valuation of $400 billion.

The Wall Street Journal and Financial Times, citing unnamed people familiar with the matter, earlier reported that a deal would value SpaceX at $800 billion.

News of SpaceX’s valuation sent shares of EchoStar Corp., a satellite TV and wireless company, up as much as 18%. Last month, Echostar had agreed to sell spectrum licenses to SpaceX for $2.6 billion, adding to an earlier agreement to sell about $17 billion in wireless spectrum to Musk’s company.

Subscribe Now: The Business of Space newsletter covers NASA, key industry events and trends.

The world’s most prolific rocket launcher, SpaceX dominates the space industry with its Falcon 9 rocket that launches satellites and people to orbit.

SpaceX is also the industry leader in providing internet services from low-Earth orbit through Starlink, a system of more than 9,000 satellites that is far ahead of competitors including Amazon.com Inc.’s Amazon Leo.

SpaceX executives have repeatedly floated the idea of spinning off SpaceX’s Starlink business into a separate, publicly traded company — a concept President Gwynne Shotwell first suggested in 2020. 

However, Musk cast doubt on the prospect publicly over the years and Chief Financial Officer Bret Johnsen said in 2024 that a Starlink IPO would be something that would take place more likely “in the years to come.”

The Information, citing people familiar with the discussions, separately reported on Friday that SpaceX has told investors and financial institution representatives that it is aiming for an initial public offering for the entire company in the second half of next year.

A so-called tender or secondary offering, through which employees and some early shareholders can sell shares, provides investors in closely held companies such as SpaceX a way to generate liquidity.

SpaceX is working to develop its new Starship vehicle, advertised as the most powerful rocket ever developed to loft huge numbers of Starlink satellites as well as carry cargo and people to moon and, eventually, Mars.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Miami Select.