128
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:
Hey y'all, dbzer0 admin there. We're not anti Genai as a technology in general but we're absolutely anti-corporate genai. I believe the only valid way to use genai is if all weights are open source and all output is in the commons. I generally hate the current techbro Ai bubble and we have no stake in it. However I will defend proles using genai for their own entertainment as much as I will defend proles using piracy likewise. We think the world is would be better without copyrights. AMA.
I believe that as it currently stands, AI is too closely tied to big corporations, especially for the average person. So, without specifically including the caveat of "this thing was generated using an open source, locally run model" or something along those lines, it's reasonable to assume it was generated by using big corp-run AI giving them more data and power over the individuals. I also think giving too much credence to AI gives the big techbro AI bubble more value and power. Additionally, AI makes it exceedingly easy for low-quality or nefarious content to proliferate and effectively choke-out thoughtful content, similar to how misinformation/disinformation takes over factual information. Like I mentioned, I agree that 'AI is just a tool', but that doesn't exclude it from being extremely frequently abused, which then puts a sour taste in my mouth. I could go on for why I tend to dislike AI in general while acknowledging what possible benefits there may be for it. None of my reasoning is founded on any of the claims db0 users were trying to force onto me.
According to your fellow admin and other very loud and rude users from db0 (whose behaviors have been validated by the same admin), that makes me a "right-wing neoliberal". Instead of engaging in a discussion about it, those people instead berated me and kept pushing the same idea.
/--edit--/
To add to this, I think a big contention point is that there is no rule against stating that you don't like AI or reasons to dislike AI, but the user's hostility were a reaction as if that were the case. If there were an instance or community rule for that, then these reactions would be understandable (though, still an overreaction IMO).
It seems to me that if you go to a community and are rude about the memes being shared you should be able to take some rudeness back.
Can we leave the "I have my first amendment rights to say anything I want, anywhere I want!" reddit bullshit on reddit? I know lemmy.world is Reddit 2 but man this is weird.
You're now participating in what was described in db0 as a "brigade". Especially with your disingenuous """summary""" of events.
How much more hypocrisy can you db0 people rack up here?
Sure dude, its a grand conspiracy with all 4 people from db0 here. We run ultra-secret discords and matrix to target users by down voting them, the most intense form of harassment. /srs
If you go into communities, respect their rules.
The pure ironic hypocrisy is just 🤌
The hypocrisy of...?
Oh wow. You genuinely don't see it? I gave you too much credit.
I don't owe you anything. You've proven that your intent here is to be a pathetic troll.
Sure bud.
I would agree with you if the rudeness was at a similar level, or if the claims made in response weren't absolutely unfounded.
Not to mention a moderator, let alone an admin, should be held to a higher standard.
We're anarchists. We absolutely demand to be held at the same standard as everyone else.
Well that would be nice if at least that was being upheld.
But the point of being held to a higher standard is because trust is an important factor. If an admin can't handle themselves better than the average person, then they shouldn't be entrusted with the responsibilities they carry. That's a standard that is equal for all people. If you are entrusted with responsibility that requires a higher than normal amount of trust, then you are expected to handle yourself in those situations better than the average person
/--edit--/
You also just ignored the other point, the main point, so that you can virtue-signal how much of an anarchist you are.
Based on your own actions, or lack of action, it doesn't seem you are here with genuine intent and instead it seems you are here more for damage control.
Our instance trusts us because they can initiate a a recall vote against any admin at any time.
I trust ya more than people who get mad at communities having their own rules and then complain on other communities about it. I don't think I've ever really had a major issue with ya.
Right wing buzzwords, no wonder you don't like anarchists.
You say two contradictory things -- that we shouldn't give AI credence, but also that it's dangerous.
I don't see how those are mutually exclusive points.
By "too much credence" I mean giving it more credit than it deserves. As in making it seem like it can do more than it's currently capable of. "Too much" does not mean "any".
Just like misinformation and disinformation, the information itself should not be given any credence, but the impacts of spreading it is that it takes significantly more effort to counteract than it does to spread it. In the case of AI, giving the same level of a platform provides an easy entry for low-quality or false-information content that's AI generated to overpower more thoughtful content at a rate that is difficult to combat.
It's weird to see the doublethink of people here.
"Exactly, we should ignore their requests and the copyright system they made!"
"We can use their tools to dismantle them! Including AI!"
How much do you want to bet that the people who think being Anti-AI is somehow revolutionary, shares memes and media without permission of the copyright holder of the images and media? Disney would love to enforce that sharing a meme with any of their IP is a crime and you must pay to do it.
The hypocrisy of these people never gets old. They'll advocate for piracy and soulseek but the moment you ask a open source, single instance AI thing to make a meme, its suddenly an affront to mankind.
i think you misunderstand entirely.
it’s not about copyright, it’s about stealing other people’s work and pretending like it’s your own, as well as selling it as your own….
as well as, it dilutes and drowns out real artists with infinite low-quality slop….
Like how piracy steals from corporations, ruining the value of the movie made in 1996?
Wait it doesn't steal, it copies. It doesn't remove anything from anyone. Same for AI. If you want art, pay an artist. Pay for the right to share the media.
nope, not like that.
people aren’t going on the pirate bay and saying, “i made this movie! it’s my creation! i’m a bittorrent director!”.
that would be like AI artists stealing things….
i don’t care about them copying things to train their models. I care about people taking the output and posing as artists.
That is fine, I can agree with most of that. It's not stealing, it's just slapping a new label on something. Maybe plagiarism is a better term.
Why on earth would you think a lack of copyright would be better for anyone (especially the labourers who actually create shit) while we all still have to live in this capitalist hellscape? Maybe in a perfect world we could do without it; but we sure as hell do not live in a perfect world.
Because copyrights are a form of enclosure and they are there to benefit the rich. It's part of the hellscape and their primary purpose is to introduce artificial scarcity so that human culture can be monetized for their benefit.
Ideas can’t be owned, and copyright and intellectual property are capitalist nonsense. If you don’t want to share an idea, don’t bring it into the world. Because once you do, it collectively belongs to the human condition.