130
PSA: lemmy.dbzer0.com labels anyone who shows any dislike for AI as a "right-wing neoliberal"
(lemmy.world)
~~They will also delete any comments that complain about AI at all, even though there is no rule against it.~~
/--edit--/
After second look, that's not entirely true, but they definitely have a trigger finger for it and leave plenty of other "off-topic" comments.
Considering the amount of posts deleted, it should have just been locked instead of nuking comments with a negative view of AI
Here's the thread in the screenshot:
https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/43426671/18476015
Also, here you can see other's seem to think this was an attempt to silence dissent (though, I don't think that this coming from drag is a great point for it):
https://lemmy.ca/post/43313594
/--/
Just look at this completely insane comment from an instance admin:
Here's my response to their points:
Personally, I can see some use for AI in very specific cases, and it still needs to be babied and the result double checked. But yeah, AI being mostly controlled by big corporations is a major part of the AI problem.
The first point i s a fact not an opinion. Example. I am an anarchist, and that makes you what? It makes you nothing. You are you and who or what I decide to be shouldn't and generally doesn't directly impact that. Now let's say you had a bad experience with an anarchist. And as a result you have chosen to be anti anarchist. That is a reaction, and by definition reactionary. That's all it really means. Nothing nefarious Etc.
Point two. I absolutely see it from a leftist point of view. But yes that's not going to hold true for everyone even if I wish it did.
With point three. And most of the rest. I think they were trying to express their understanding and seek clarification on your part much as I have. What IS anti AI. Is it purely reactionary and without thought. Or is it more considered, focused on the dangers posed by authoritarians and fascists empowered by those tools. I'm leaning towards thinking its generally the latter. However it seems one or both of you might be talking passed the other. I doubt you disagree as much as you think you might.
Your argument is that having an opinion on something is by definition reactionary? That makes no sense.
You're reading the entire discussion wrong. My entire point is that they are actually calling people who show literally any dislike in AI a "right wing neoliberal", and that is just flat-out wrong.
I'm not talking past anyone. I was trying to discuss that point in particular and no one wanted to explain the logic behind it. (Which makes sense considering it's an insane take in the first place.)
There is no universe where I would even come close to agreeing with that completely mental attitude.
No not in an overtly negative sense. I think all of us are reactionary to an extent and that it's inescapable. Myself for instance despite being a lefty. I am very anti-authoritarian. As such anti-leninist. I have a very negative reaction anytime I'm around anyone who would identify themselves in terms of leninism or adjacency. It's well justified.
Now say for instance anyone posting from a .ml domain. If I just automatically down voted them on sight without considering their arguments Etc that is very negative reactionarily. Because the ml domain servers were some of the first ones. Many people who do not share that ideology ended up on those servers. Therefore I cannot assume that they all espouse that ideology.
Think of it in terms of poison versus allergy. Your body's reaction to a poison is often very Justified because of the life-threatening nature. Even though it is a reaction. Your body's reaction to an allergy however is extremely different. The allergy is generally to something that ultimately would be benign to you. But your body sort of freaks out if that makes sense.
And I don't deny that I could be reading it wrong. Because I haven't really read the whole thing. I've just seen your side and the image snippet of what they posted. Not the whole conversation. But I do know how easy it is for people to talk past each other. Become offended and then reactionarily recalcitrant.
No. To put it very simply, having an opinion about something is not reactionary. It seems you are distilling down the concept of "reactionary" too much, and by that definition any human interaction is "reactionary" which makes it lose any meaning and then becomes a useless term.
You really don't need to see any more than what's provided to see how clear it is that I'm not talking past anyone, considering how insane the take is from the start.
But, here's an overview:
It may be my ASD, perhaps I didn't explain clearly. Let's try an absurdist example. I have a thing here. I will not tell you it's name or describe it to you. What is your opinion of this "thing"? Is it the best of it's kind of thing? The worst? Maybe it's just average. Perhaps I'm holding a literal piece of shit. You can't know. So can you form any sort if concrete opinion about it, without having anything to react to? Logic would say no. Now if I showed it to you and let you react to it and form an opinion about it. Is that a bad thing? No. Of course not. Now what if you used your reaction/opinion of this specific thing to judge all future remotely similar things without consideration? Could that be a negative? Absolutely.
Having a reaction is normal and human. Humans are reactionary by necessity/nature. As is using those reactions as assistance in future decisions. Nothing wrong with any of that right. The problem creeps up when we let the reactions/opinions control us. And honestly, so far talking to you I haven't gotten any sense of problematic reactionary nature. 🤷♂️ But I think we probably could both acknowledge that there are some attitudes around this topic that are on many sides. I mean after all that was kind of my whole point for even posting here. Just to understand if this was just a reactionary community that was against all machine learning and AI just for the sake of it. Or if it was more focused on the current negative Tech bro b*******. And so far I'm thinking it's more the latter.
No, I'm certain I understand what you're trying to say. It's an overly distilled idea of the term "reactionary" to be "any kind of reaction". You're describing having a "reaction" in the sense of responding to information or stimulus, but that's not what "reactionary" means.
It means being excessively predisposed to having a negative reaction, or to immediately jump to a negative reaction to some sort of change. It's specifically negative in its definition. That's why I say it's an opinion, because it's pushing a specific characterization that having any negative opinion of AI means you are merely acting based on an initial negative reaction, possibly or even likely based on a resistance to change, rather than having an opinion based on a real consideration of the idea and the circumstances around it.