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:
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.
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.
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.
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.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
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.
deleted by creator
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.
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 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.
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.
We think the world is would be better without copyrights.
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.
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?
$5 says they used an LLM to make that response
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™.
Tech bro is a snappy phrase, so it consumes more than it should. What snappy phrase encompasses Cory Doctorow? I want that label.
Nonsense. If people used genai the way we suggest in dbzer0, AI techbros would be in ruins. We’re also generally in the same camp as those people you mention (even though they’re still libs) but we still have disagreements since, well, we’re not libs and don’t think there’s any merit to things like copyrights.
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.
You can run that shit locally if you want to shell out hundreds or thousands of dollars for a high end GPU, but I agree with your overall point.
Point 7 is telling.
;tldr they ban anti-AI because they’re in the AI game.
That implies they profit from it. I doubt that’s the case.
Yeah the horde isnt a paid thing
seize means of production is funny af, any ai thats opensource controlled by the average person will never compete with corporate resources, or rich ppl, we arent seizing anything, training our replacements we wont be able to use the top tier models well be priced out hard
What do we get, mediocre art, there is already so much art out there that I get an exestential crisis about not being able to read all the books I want to read before I die. Forget tv and movies, I dont need ai generation ruining my feeds, making it harder to find books or animations. This is the most frustrating thing, getting into blender and animation just for every hashtag result being filled with ai. Took me forever to find ppl to follow in the sea of ai trash. You know its not ai when it appeals to the eyes for more than 5 seconds.
Yep, lmao. It was well written and made some points, then the advertisement came and all credibility disappeared.
It was well written and made some points
Gonna have to disagree with you on both parts of that.
I didn’t say they were good or bad points, just points. Compared to other arguments I’ve seen, it was written better than most. Could have been AI generated, though.
Well, there was an implication that they were good points, though I can see now that was unintentional.
Consider how the phrase “you’ve got a point” is often used to describe a valid point worth considering. I would consider “a valid point worth considering” a worthy definition of “a good point.”
Well that’s disappointing
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.
I’ve blocked the instance at this point, but that comment thread was on yepowertrippinbastards in response to a thread that got practically nuked.
Here’s the thread: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/43418415
Although the removed comments are not showing up in the moderation log, I see that your tireless devotion to the topic over the past 24 hours has provided us with at least one screencap of what seems to be one of the deleted comments. It was pretty low-quality, mildly insulting, and not worth thinking about for more than the 5 seconds its author did. Anyway good luck with your crusade.
Since I don’t think it would be right to assume you’re just stupid, the only explanation for mischaracterizing me is that it’s intentional in order to demean me and make it seem like you have some sort of valid reason for it.
You’re making some big assumptions on the intentions behind my actions. Apparently, to you, if you respond when you get a notification because people reply to your comments, that means a “tireless devotion”. I came across a post calling out the moderation actions of a thread I was a part of and commented on that, then shortly after I realized any meaningful discussion was never going to happen and I blocked the instance, I then come across a post on “fuck_AI” and thought I had a very relevant experience to post here. And now I am on a “crusade”.
Well, it’s a good thing you only have intentions of being an asshole, because the alternative would require being pretty damn stupid.
… I then come across a post on “fuck_AI”
For a moment you had me going there, but no, it really does say OP beside your username.
Yes, I came across another post on this community and remembered it existed. After having a very recent experience that is relevant to the community, in that an instance admin is pushing an “AI or else” attitude, I thought it would be something people would be interested to hear about.
You’re making me second guess that your intention was to be an asshole. But, now that I think of it, it could be both!
I’m banned from a lot of dbzer0 for the sin of downvoting AI slop
wait, you can’t have been banned from there from just downvoting slop…
According to modlogs that’s the case
deleted by creator
now those communities won’t be in their feed.
Banning a user does not remove that community’s content from their feed.
it’s not really productive to downvote a community’s content on principle. That’s what the block button is for.
Definitely, provided that’s what actually happened.
I would agree that it’s a rational response as a way to protect the community from that kind of behavior.
deleted by creator
No big. There’s a lot of idiosyncrasies to Lemmy that are unintuitive. I wouldn’t expect everyone to be familiar with all of them.
That’s too bad. I joined because of piracy. But they are a bit rigid in their ideologies as one would expect from a niche tech community but this is too much. Where should I go next?
Link to the thread, dont post a screenshot
I blocked the instance, but I had already taken a screenshot.
But I went out of my way to get this for you:
https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/43426671/18476015
