- cross-posted to:
- justpost@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- justpost@lemmy.world
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/29035971
Posting here for preservation’s sake
Image in removed comment was the attached Palpatine image. Curious to see if the same admin mod would remove these screenshots if I crosspost them to !yepowertrippinbastards@lemmy.dbzer0.com , which they also admin and mod. Would I get a fair trial there or will my dissenting and others’ be silenced?
You can’t say you’re against disinfo if you’re knowing and intentionally promulgating it and abetting its usage. They also didn’t even remove the Reddit watermark.
This is why I don’t assign identities unto myself, because you criticize one action done wrong by leaders of an ideology or movement and bam! you’re shut out of it completely. They’ve lost the aid of an ally and progress is impeded by being shorted a participant trying to correct the course.
I disagree with how a lot of that thread was moderated, and I do think that a permaban was a heavy-handed. Not that you weren’t necessarily entirely without fault.
I’d say it’s a combo of BPR and PTB
This is a copyleft, pro genAI instance. We don’t even agree that copyright or intellectual property is moral, let alone the argument tat keeps popping up that it’s “stealing”. Once you release an idea to the world, it becomes part of the human condition. It doesn’t belong to you, and saying you “own” something that’s a part of another person’s consciousness is akin to saying slavery is acceptable.
There are plenty of safe spaces for that neoliberal capitalist bullshit, but on an anarchist instance is not it. They deserved it, and I think it should be made into an instance-wide rule that anti-AI conversation be banned for being in direct contradictions to our morals and political philosophy, with repeat violators being banned.
I think copyright is wrong, but I tend to avoid ai for different reasons.
Ai scraping and posts are a near effective ddos on the entire internet, and its harming scraping as a whole.
And that’s a good reason to hate the usage, but that’s not a problem with AI, that’s a problem with capitalism.
Those aren’t the only reasons to dislike AI. So, claiming that any argument against AI is inherently neoloberal capitalist is ignorant and childish.
Even were that true, which is isn’t, this is our instance, to run as we see fit. It isn’t up to right-wing liberals to decide how an anarchist collective runs their own space. If you don’t like genAI, so somewhere else and don’t post your cultist brigading bullshit here. You sure as fuck don’t see us going to .world and harassing you lot over AI, do you?
So what, the respect we show you is too fucking much to return?
I see. So your method of arguing is to label anyone whom you disagree with as “right-wing liberals” and you don’t intend on having a genuine conversation.
no, my method of arguing is to label liberals who espouse right-wing capitalist ideals as right-wing liberals. if you don’t like being called right-wing, don’t fucking pander to corporate bullshit in a LEFTIST INSTANCE. it’s really not rocket science, guys.
Then you must first explain how all arguments against AI are right-wing capitalist ideals. Which you have not done that, so the way you are acting is preposterous.
In total, you’ve made zero arguments for the logic that any sentiment of disliking AI should be met with hostility and all comes from a source of “right-wing liberals”. All I see is unfounded attempts of vilifying people who simply disagree with you by shoving a label onto them. Another way to describe this is “bad-jacketing”.
I suggest you read about “bad-jacketing”. Particularly as a moderator and that it is described in rule 1 of the instance.
I will now disengage because I have ample evidence that you and _cryptagion don’t intend on a genuine interaction.
I agreed until you got to the point that anti-AI conversation should be banned. And because I agreed up to that point, I think I joined the wrong instance. I could go along with y’all being pro-AI because im not inherently against it, just cautious as a person, knowing people abuse any kind of power far too often. And, I dont have to use AI in my life while still having anarchist beliefs. It’s a choice, so long as you hold no power and do no damage to others with your tools . . Banning conversation is holding power and using it against others, which is inherently not anarchy.
I guess the Anarchism I grew up with has changed. Bummer to hear.
Edit to add, I’m really tired of labels, I’m tired of having to put myself in a box for social media to digest.
Edit: I guess we’re going to be voting on allowing people to bitch about generative AI soon. I’m pretty torn on it, because I am so tired of people bitching ceaselessly on this topic, but also… Censorship is lame.
This isn’t censorship. They’ll still be allowed to post anti-AI slop literally anywhere else besides the ONE PRO-AI INSTANCE IN THE FEDIVERSE.
Not even that, just certain communities here which allow AI. They could make an anti-AI community here if it follows all of dbzer0’s rules, is good faith and doesn’t encourage trolling or aggression towards others.
This is banding together to defend our communities from those who would do us harm, That’s mutual aid, and there isn’t anything more anarchist than that. If you don’t agree, then you probably weren’t very aligned with anarchism in the first place.
I guess I don’t understand the correlation between banning speech that hurts no one, (a computer does not have feelings, nor is it sentient) and mutual aid? What barriers are you trying to collectively overcome by not allowing folks to discuss the benefits, risks and/or negatives of AI in our lives? It feels akin to someone telling me global warming and climate change arnt real so I should fuck off, I don’t belong, that speech is banned.
Anarchism is older than AI, I guess that’s where I feel the shift, and I only feel it here. Being new to lemmy, these two Incorporated ideas, I’ve never seen together before.
Side tangent, so you know where i am coming from. My definition of Anarchism stems from the early 90’s punk scene. In the late 90s, I was taught some of my computer literacy from a man who once hacked the KKK website back when, and made a mockery of it, told me he held the domain for so many months. His probation wouldn’t even allow him access to a land line it was absurd. He showed me how to use IRC, and I thought it was incredible, and glorious. That was freedom, of course until the power caught on. Even then, we persist.
I don’t understand how discussing the dangers of AI is withholding anyone’s freedom, nor do I understand how banning the speech is mutual aid.
I guess I can understand you want to protect your group of folks from people constantly questioning something you strongly believe in. But my previous questions stand. If you are up to it, feel free to enlighten me, I am an old goat these days, and I really am curious.
Edit, I guess I never thought of mutual aid as anything more than helping your neighbors and community physically, I never saw mutual aid as protecting thoughts. I guess if you reframe the definition to also protecting thoughts, and beliefs, I can see how you would consider this mutual aid, as you’re trying to protect your group from bombardment of arguing on the topic. I do think it’s a bit of a stretch to define it in such way, but I can respect it. My goal isn’t to seek argument, but to be informed. I only asked here because the topic came up, I generally ignore the AI conversations, The idea of banning speech just, should always be looked at speculatively, generally, the folks who are banning speech aren’t the good guys, as history tells. But sometimes it’s proper, is it proper here? I don’t know, and of course, I don’t think it’s up for you or me to decide, but rather collectively.
Personally I am super aware AI can be used to manipulate and persuade large swaths of people. The potential for abuse is easy for me to see. While it is a neat tool, I was more fascinated with fungi and the intelligence new science is finding within it today, than I am with algorithms and other non tanglible things. I am very cautious of my privacy, and not very tech savvy anymore, as its gotten more complicated.
This is where the fear, for me, of AI comes in. As our government swings more fascist here where I live, I’m weary of anyone making large promises of it’s benefits without questions, and I only commented because I have these thoughts, and then see in a conversation on the topic, people saying it’s not anarchist and speech questioning a specific technology should be banned. A technology usually funded by billionaires, or upper class folks who don’t understand working class struggle. The comment to ban speech on the negatives of AI just set off mad flags for me, so I thought I’d ask for more clarification.
There’s a big difference between discussing the pro/cons of something, and brigading communities on a pro-AI instance to push your own agenda. As of this moment, people have already been banned in the last 24 hours for vote manipulation, and more than one person has spun up alts to comment and vote on topics they’ve already put in their word on.
There’s a very simple word to describe what’s happening to db0, and that word is an attack. When you’re attacked, you defend yourself. Nobody is banning anti-AI speech, we’re banning it here. This instance does not represent the entirety of the fediverse. Nobody banned here is being kept from posting that speech literally anywhere else.
Heard, I wish this was the first response. Thank you for taking the time to clarify.
I’d encourage you to read the experience of one of our mods in this post to better understand the impact of this type of behaviour on our mods and users: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/43560521. It’s by no means a victimless activity. We aren’t proposing to ban discussion about AI. If someone wants to make a post in an appropriate community like the /0 main community about our GenAI policy then that is totally fine. But dogpiling the comments of posts in a community that doesn’t prohibit GenAI is just trolling imo.
Well said!