Openai CEO Sam Altman’s recent X post is a reasonable case of irony. The person who created equipment to blur the line between humans and AI is now the most difficult squinting to see it. Taking X (aka Twitter), he has admitted that he can no longer tell humans with bots on social media, an acceptance that neatly leads to the growing authenticity of the Internet. The comment followed a strange moment on Reddit, where Altman scrolled through a stream of praise on the Codex programming tool of Openai. The problem was that he could not feel that none of it was real.

“I think it’s all fake/bots, even though in this case I know that the growth of Codex is really strong, and the trend here is real,” he wrote on X, Twitter in the east. The AI ​​system of his own company trained in the part on reddit discussions is now generating materials that seem unnaturally like human voices that shape them. And in return, humans have started imitation of the strangeness of the AI ​​speech, created a feedback loop where no one can tell who is copying who is copying.

The number behind this synthetic flood is staggering. Cyber ​​security firm Empiva estimated last year that all web had come from more than half of the bot or big language models of traffic. X’s in-house bot Groke has moved even further, suggesting that “millions of bots” roam daily on the stage. In this context, Altman’s restlessness is a personal revelation low and how the online landscape has distorted, a snapshot is more.

Openai is not immune for the same trust problems that have been exposed to others. Its major GPT-5 launch earlier this year makes users mumbling about personality innings, meaningless credit and incomplete answers. Even Altman’s Reddit AMA, where he accepted in a rocky rollout, failed to rebuild the confidence of the community. When he later observed in real time, “real people raised the Quirks of LLM-speech,” it looked less like an off-hand comment and like an accidental diagnosis of a very large cultural problem.

According to reports, critics suspect that Altman’s sudden concern may also be a strategic purpose. Reports came out in April that Openai is searching for its social network for rival X and Meta’s Facebook. Painting existing platforms in the form of bot-ride eco chambers can act as a perfect preamble for marketing an alleged “authentic” option. Nevertheless, evidence suggests that it may be impossible to build a bot-free place. Researchers at the University of Amsterdam created an experimental network perfectly by AI agents, only to see them quickly that they make their own clix, bias and echo chambers.

The implications are beyond social feed. The AI-actual writing is infiltrating schools, journalism and even legal matters, raising the fundamental question about how we judge truth and writer. Altman’s entry is particularly striking due to reference: he was not questioning hostile campaigns or rival campaigning, but the authenticity of his company’s products celebrating the posts.

This accidental suspicion captures the contradiction of the AI ​​era. Many tools designed to increase communication are eradicating our ability to recognize authentic human expression. Whether Altman’s words were a clear reflection or a calculated trick to prepare the ground for the next venture of Openai, they point to a disturbed reality. If the CEOs of the world’s most influential AI company cannot tell if their greatest cheerleaders are real people or synthetic voices, perhaps no one can do.