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.

  • _cryptagion [he/him]@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    1513·
    4 days ago

    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?

    • go $fsck yourself@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1413·
      4 days ago

      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.

      • _cryptagion [he/him]@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
        1412·
        4 days ago

        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.

        • go $fsck yourself@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1311·
          4 days ago

          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.

          • Unruffled [they/them]@lemmy.dbzer0.comM
            159·
            4 days ago
            1. Being anti-AI is an intrinsically reactionary position to hold.
            2. Leftists should be trying to seize the means of production, not trying to destroy them.
            3. The anti-AI movement puts heavy emphasis on the impact on artists, but most leftists don’t believe in copyright or the ownership/privatization of ideas and that includes things like art. Artists absolutely should be publicly funded and properly compensated for their work. But simply fighting against AI tooling will accomplish nothing, and arguably serves to perpetuates copyright rent-seeking by corporations and individuals.
            4. Fighting against or banning the use of AI tools in leftist spaces will accomplish nothing, except to give the capitalists an advantage over leftists. The genie is already out of the bottle. AI tooling, although incredibly annoying in some aspects (such as when it gets inserted into fucking notepad) is also extremely powerful and useful for certain applications. Why would we want to fight with a hand tied behind our backs over some romantic idyll of pre-gen AI times?
            5. A hammer can be a tool or a weapon. Same with AI. Nobody is talking about banning hammers, despite the fact they are often used as weapons or for nefarious purposes.
            6. The anti-AI movement is primitivist and regressive in nature. It hearkens back to the “good old days” when artists were well compensated by rich patrons, and artisans and skilled craftsmen filled every small town. It’s a fantasy that never really existed, and one that will never exist under capitalism.
            7. FOSS AI projects are available such as Db0’s AI Horde which seeks to democratic access to GenAI. There is no requirement to use corporate tooling.
            • go $fsck yourself@lemmy.worldEnglish
              128·
              3 days ago
              1. That’s an opinion, not a fact. And while I agree that in many circumstances there are plenty of reactionary responses, it does not get anywhere close to 100%.
              2. Irrelevant to the point.
              3. You’re conflating an “anti-AI movement” with just not liking AI.
              4. I never made any claims about banning AI or even fighting against it, really. Not sure why you’re ascribing that to me, and it doesn’t provide any argument to the main claim that “disliking AI is always from right-wing capitalism”.
              5. While I get your overall point here and mostly agree that AI is ‘just a tool’, the rest of your point is based on banning, which is not part of the discussion. Also, it’s a pretty false equivalent argument, but I assume you’re not expecting it to be a 1:1 comparison, just trying to make the point that it’s just a tool and should not be labeled as inherently bad.
              6. Once again, you’re conflating an “anti-AI movement” with just not liking AI. I don’t know if there’ some big coordinated “anti-AI movement” that makes that argument in particular and I’ve somehow never heard of it or seen any evidence of, but it seems to me you’ve created a fake, absurd strawman.
              7. That’s great and helps obviate one of my main issues with AI.

              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.

              • irelephant [he/him]🍭@lemm.ee
                5·
                2 days ago

                For a disengage call to be valid, it must not be accompanied by other arguments on the existing topic. A disengage is not meant to be a trump card to have the last word.

                I don’t think it works like that.

              • Mystic Mushroom [Ze/Zir]@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                106·
                3 days ago

                You’re conflating an “anti-AI movement” with just not liking AI.

                @Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com is literally an admin, they have access to voter and user metric data that you don’t. Who are you to claim there isn’t brigading or a movement going on? That’s right you don’t and can’t actually know better than they do. If I didn’t know better I might think you were trying to deny this issue due to your part in it.

                  • Unruffled [they/them]@lemmy.dbzer0.comMEnglish
                    6·
                    3 days ago

                    Yeah, thanks for the heads up. I’ve proposed in !div0_governance@lemmy.dbzer0.com to update the instance rules to disallow anti-genAI trolling in communities where genAI is allowed. They can take their pro-copyright-rentseeking campaign elsewhere. Don’t know why they thought it would fly here.

                    I’ve got no real problem with folks taking that position tbh, but it’s not ok to dogpile posts on our communities like has happened here. I’m also somewhat sympathetic to the argument that GenAI is having an impact on artists’ livelihoods. But they haven’t connected the dots that this is only an issue because of greedy corporations trying to fuck over artists. They are directing all their anger towards GenAI instead of the real source of the problem. By all means advocate for greedy corporations to stop using AI to increase their profits at the expense of artists. But to come into a leftist space and demand that we stop using AI too is at best tokenistic, and at worst just serves to obfuscate the fundamental problem.

                    The users engaged in trolling here and tying to excuse it as “activism” should think harder about who they are fighting with and why. Even if we did capitulate and ban genAI, that would have zero impact on artists, because we don’t pay for artists in the first place. It’s nothing but virtue signalling and tokenism. The Luddites didn’t go around breaking into peoples houses and smashing their spinning wheels. They went to factories owned by rich men and companies to destroy machinery in order to disrupt production and fight for workers rights and safety. Good on them too! If the anti genAI brigade were fighting against Getty’s (or Adobe, etc.) use of AI that might actually have a useful leftist purpose, and the analogy with the Luddites would work. Instead they are here causing a nuisance in a leftist community, over some random crossposted GenAI meme. Good work guys - job done I guess, the capitalists must be quaking in their boots right now because of your “activism”.

                • go $fsck yourself@lemmy.worldEnglish
                  57·
                  3 days ago

                  Blatantly ignoring disengage while also making absolutely unfounded and ridiculous claims. Absolutely shameful.

                  You think admins are infallible? You’re only attacking me with these claims because I’m calling out someone who happens to be an admin. They are still human and, clearly, capable of doing wrong.

                  The whole point of this conversation is that it is wrong to assume everyone who simply shows a dislike in AI is a ‘right-wing pro-capitalist liberal’. That is a judgement of a person’s ideals and values based on a single metric that has no inherent connection to right-wing liberalism.

                  Now you have convinced me to block this entire instance because of this abhorrent behavior.

                  • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comM
                    12·
                    3 days ago

                    Blatantly ignoring disengage while also making absolutely unfounded and ridiculous claims. Absolutely shameful.

                    You are attempting to abuse the disengage rule. If you want to disengage, you’re not supposed to also try to put the last word in. Just disengage without arguing further.