this post was submitted on 04 May 2025
128 points (78.1% liked)

Fuck AI

2615 readers
1018 users here now

"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"

A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

~~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:

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] TootSweet@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago

Locking this thread. I think it'd be good to add some civility-related rules to the sidebar. As folks know, this community has a lot of mods, and I don't want to make too many of such decisions unilaterally, so to any of the other /c/fuck_ai mods who want to be involved in that discussion, please DM me. Worst case, we'll set up a place to talk through the specific language. But if I don't hear anything, I'll probably just add something to the sidebar.

In the meantime, quit it with the direct attacks on other users. If you can't make your point civilly, make it elsewhere.

I'd also like to thank db0 for dropping in to speak for the dbzer0 instance.

[–] kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone 30 points 1 day ago (5 children)

As an Anarcho-Syndicalist (basically as far left as you can possibly get), multiple things can be simultaneously true:

  1. Private property is theft as is copyright
  2. Art should be publically funded
  3. Capitalism is fundamentally evil
  4. AI is theft
  5. Tech bros are bootlickers

AI is a fundamentally reactionary tool, it does not serve the worker and does little more than serve the capitalist. It feeds off of real work that real workers do so that capitalists can claim that they can do work like real workers. However they cannot, only a true worker can make art and music. Art and music comes from what fundamentally makes us human, thats why AI and Capitalists cannot make art.

DOWN TO REACTION, DOWN TO THE DECEIVERS, DOWN TO THE TYRANTS

[–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 1 day ago

I think a key point here is that none of the admins or mods of dbz0 have claimed its real art, or that something else is lesser art, as far as I can see. I may be completely wrong, and I'll amend that claim if so.

However they cannot, only a true worker can make art and music. Art and music comes from what fundamentally makes us human, thats why AI and Capitalists cannot make art.

Indeed. My favorite musicians are in fact human. Art is not made for money, art is made to express something, something intangible. I think the moment people get into a "who would pay for this" instantly lose the argument, as art should not be profit focused.

I don't sing in the shower because I think it'll be a smash hit on TikTok or whatever, I do it because its fun to sing in the shower.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 32 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (5 children)

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.

[–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It's weird to see the doublethink of people here.

"We don't want corporations to control everything! They have too much power!"

"Exactly, we should ignore their requests and the copyright system they made!"

"Yeah! Copyright doesn't help us! Pirate everything!"

"We can use their tools to dismantle them! Including AI!"

"Woah, I don't know if I actually agree with copyright being abolished... Maybe copyright is actually good when companies get to abuse the laws they made... I'm for copyright abolishment in everything but using tools."

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.

[–] xor@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 day ago (3 children)

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….

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] gofsckyourself@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

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).

[–] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 1 day ago (7 children)

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.

[–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 1 day ago (6 children)
  • Goes into a community.
  • Ignores the rules and community and says they're wrong for doing something in their free time on their own space.
  • Gets the rules applied to them and told to stop, golden rule is applied to them when they were being rude in the first place.
  • Complains about mod abuse on another community, claiming victim that rules were enforced on them.

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.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world 36 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Getting reports over content in different instances. -_-

If someone comes here pushing AI slop then yeah I'm not opposed to whipping out the banhammer, but I don't really care what folks are posting elsewhere, and I'd rather not see Fuck AI become focused on drama in other communities.

Up or downvote as you see fit, but please don't use the report button as an 'extra big-ass downvote!'

[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 14 points 1 day ago

Up or downvote as you see fit, but please don't use the report button as an 'extra big-ass downvote!'

What am I supposed to do when somebody says something I don't like online?!

That shit needs to be taken down ASAP, chop chop, champ!

[–] gofsckyourself@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

When an instance admin is pushing an "AI or else" attitude, I consider that relevant. Though, it does have a significant drama element to it. If that's still not acceptable in spite of apparent relevance, just let me know and I'll excuse myself.

[–] Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago

I don't have an issue with the topic you posted in-and-of-iteself. It's not like we have clear-cut rules here beyond the name of the community, to which absolutely it's relevant.

What bugs me is how heated people are getting over an incident that's not even in this community. I'm not going to take mod action here over posts in another community, and it seems silly/petty that the conversation about it here is generating so many user reports.

And I mean, look at my own post history - I get heated about shit too. I get it. We -self included- need to just take a fuckin' chill pill sometimes.

[–] haverholm@kbin.earth 56 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Ugh, that's disappointing. The screendumped list of arguments that "leftists are per definition pro-AI" is reductive and cherrypicked. I guess they can get into the sea with the rest of the "AI" bros.

To be perfectly clear, I don't think the copyright system is anywhere near perfect, especially not the way it has been expanded to benefit corporations rather than actual creators. But it is really the only available legal protection against the gross ethical infringement on human artistry that the "AI" corpos have committed to tran their models.

I'm as black and red as they come — as well as an artist and arts teacher — and that litany of BS arguments does not represent me in the least. I would and have made art without certainty of compensation. That doesn't make my art or anyone else's up for grabs to create piss poor replacements for our skill and craft.

"GenAI" is not a threat to human creativity in itself— it only reproduces lowest common denominator results from the material it's trained upon. But the fact that indiscriminate morons actually think those statistically miscalculated songs, texts or images are as good as what people make? That's the real existential crisis.

[–] gofsckyourself@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I completely share your sentiments. Especially about copyright. It's a really shitty and fucked up system, but it's the only tool available for people to use for protection.

For AI, it's important to repudiate all of the bad uses of AI so that we can distill out any possible good uses for it.

[–] haverholm@kbin.earth 19 points 1 day ago

In terms of "AI", I find the scare quotes important because we absolutely do not have actual AI, only a misleading hype phrase to sell a miserably underperforming product. I'm with Ted Chiang that what we do have is applied statistics.

But I agree that there are reasonable, constructive uses. Primarily in, yes, statistics and language research, but that's not where we see the technology making its most hyped inroads. Probably because they're neither sexy or profitable enough to return the investments that have gone into developing these contraptions.

The most infuriating thing to me is that the companies behind are willing to not just steal creatives' work in the mad dash for profitability, but also diminish the standing of our crafts and raze our already limited fields of income to do so.

And then some tw—t on an online forum decides that """AI""" is the required tool for a socialist revolution? Excuse me while I go punch a wall.

[–] atrielienz@lemmy.world 31 points 1 day ago (1 children)

So checks notes people who are against capitalist corporate Generative AI LLM's because they're just thieving all and sundry and ignoring any laws that might stop them are checks notes pro-capitalism Alt-Right supporters who... Checks notes a third time support Trump and all the capitalist companies bolstering his presidency in order to prevent regulations of Generative AI LLM's.

Did I get that right?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] kibiz0r@midwest.social 22 points 1 day ago (2 children)

The db0 instance has been the #1 disappointment for me on Lemmy.

If you count yourself as a leftist and advocate of electronic freedoms… but you find yourself on the opposing side against Robert Evans, Molly White, and Cory Doctorow, you might wanna reconsider whether you’ve been scammed into a libertarian tech bro version of Freedom™.

[–] jsomae@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 day ago

Tech bro is a snappy phrase, so it consumes more than it should. What snappy phrase encompasses Cory Doctorow? I want that label.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] spongebue@lemmy.world 28 points 1 day ago

$5 says they used an LLM to make that response

[–] xep@fedia.io 19 points 1 day ago (1 children)

AI doesn't work without the availability of highly scalable compute, such as AWS or Azure. "Means of production" is a questionable concept when applied to digital things, since there isn't scarcity, and "goods" can be infinitely copied once produced. If anything, encouraging usage of AI in its current form increases our dependence on large corporations and the infrastructure that only they can build and subsidize.

I thought that point was rather questionably argued.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] sundray@lemmus.org 17 points 1 day ago
[–] Cephalotrocity@biglemmowski.win 13 points 1 day ago (7 children)

Point 7 is telling.

;tldr they ban anti-AI because they're in the AI game.

[–] gofsckyourself@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago (1 children)

That implies they profit from it. I doubt that's the case.

[–] Agosagror@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 1 day ago

Yeah the horde isnt a paid thing

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] kbal@fedia.io 11 points 1 day ago (5 children)

Do you happen to have any evidence at all that they "delete any comments that complain about AI"? Because it seems unlikely, given that the only thing you came up with to support that statement is a comment expressing opinions about AI with which you presumably disagree.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Montagge@lemmy.zip 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I'm banned from a lot of dbzer0 for the sin of downvoting AI slop

[–] jbk@discuss.tchncs.de 8 points 1 day ago (5 children)

wait, you can't have been banned from there from just downvoting slop…

[–] Montagge@lemmy.zip 9 points 1 day ago

According to modlogs that's the case

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Luci@lemmy.ca 11 points 1 day ago

Well that's disappointing

load more comments
view more: next ›