If you have the resources of a nation state then you already have the resources to push your agenda through traditional media. It's not clear what benefit this type of AI generated content would have over the traditional approach.
Asymmetric information warfare. Flood every channel with misleading and contradicting information beyond the capacity for fact-checking. Make entirely fake social media threads to steer perceptions towards a predetermined direction. Create exaggerated stereotypes of both sides of a debate to inflame and harden opinions.
All of this is already being done right now. The difference is that a robust language model would allow this to be done with far fewer humans involved. Fewer people to raise their hands about how far down the ethical rabbit hole they are willing to go. And a single AI model could react to news much more quickly than a team of people who have to sleep at some point.
The human writers are constrained by what they think they can get away with. The automated writers don't even work that way. You can see from the examples used in discussions here, the more limited the domain of discourse the more convincing the samples are (except the hello world one that looked like a mash-up of every programming tutorial ever written). I think this thing could do a great job making fake announcements to air travelers about flight delays.
I think the synthetic texts are already convincing enough that the natural desire to try to impart meaning to writings/utterances will go a long way to convincing forum user "victims" that something is being said that needs to be thought about. And here in this discussion, we know that the fakes are fakes (except for one comment which is unlabeled and I'm not sure about), in an aggression against a forum the fakes won't be labeled.
