Using 100% Ai content on Web 2.0s - Good or Bad

WAndreas · Nov 6, 2024

darkleusa said:
if it's made with really good AI, so no problems
i like it
but if it was made using awful ai, where photo looks like child has drawn it, i hate it

AI is constantly and rapidly improving, what was in the top six months ago is now like an ordinary unit. The way out, perhaps, is to use the paid versions. I have not tried them, for some reason I think that the difference cannot be significant. This means that there is always an antidote for poison. And that's what search engines will use.
I think so.

Nikolaos · Nov 7, 2024

Ocke86 said:
What do you guys think about using 100% Ai content on Web 2.0s (articles) as Tier 1s, good or a bad idea and do you have any experience from doing that ?

Appreciate all the answers regarding this

A.I. content isn't bad as long as it is useful. I've seen a lot of websites rank with A.I. content.

Reviewzshop · Nov 7, 2024

Following

williamsharris143 · Nov 10, 2024

XrumerGeek said:
If you're using fully handwritten content on Web 2.0 and tiered sites, you are WASTING YOUR PRECIOUS TIME. Totally unnecessary.

Yes, using fully handwritten is surely going to to take a lot of time but it is better to rewrite the AI created content and add something unique in it to get most benefit.

DangerJones · Nov 10, 2024

Web 2.0 and tiered sites can handle AI as long as you do the slightest amount of editing and adjustment and add just a bit of personality in case of manual review. A good speed editor can blaze through a dozen an hour. It’s worth the extra effort.

Using 100% Ai content on Web 2.0s - Good or Bad

WAndreas

Elite Member

Nikolaos

Elite Member

Reviewzshop

Newbie

williamsharris143

Junior Member

DangerJones

Junior Member

Main Menu

Marketplace

Making Money

BlackHat World