- 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.
You must log in or register to comment.
YDI, what did you expect coming into a leftist anti-copyright community on a leftist anti-copyright instance? You whine about AI in every post and comment using it. You need to learn to block them, otherwise you’ll keep having experiences like these.
YDI. This is an anarchist, copyleft instance. We don’t value the capitalist idea of intellectual property. Take that neoliberal bullshit back to the centrist safe spaces.
YDI.
You can complain all you like in here, feel free.
Different communities have different purposes and different moderation guidelines. So I think this is a ridiculous take. The lefty memes comm is of course going to be seen by certain people as “propaganda”, but it’s not for them, it’s for leftists. If other folks also enjoy it then great, but if not, no big deal.
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.
(So) what?? We have no rules against reposting AI generated images in that community. What AI images have I ever posted to FvD? None, zero, sfa… unless they were the subject of a debunking article. So it was just a bullshit troll comment afaik.
But we do have an instance rule that says “Fuck around and find out”, a community rule in Lefty Memes that says “1. Socialist Unity in the form of mutual respect and good faith interactions is enforced here” and finally " 3. No liberalism, (right-wing) revisionism or reactionaries."
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.
Also you:
I’m not feeling a lot of allyship vibes from that tbh.
The reason you got a permaban is because the anti-ai crowd usually can’t stop themselves from banging on about it. If you agree to not post bullshit troll comments in the community again then I’ll consider reducing the ban.
You’ll notice that my interactions with the community prior have been sparse; the community clearly does not live up to its self-description of “a place for undogmatic shitposting”, but there are some points presented in the bounded ideology that I see reason in and there are some posts/comments there that I see needing reason added to them. Your quote of mine and the following screenshot are not in disagreement with each other. My loyalty is not to an in-group. My loyalty is to reality. My alliance is with the allies of truth, and the content of the dogma is partially true so I considered the community a partial ally with whom we shared some common goals and enemies. I have no in-group, and my out-group is comprised of those who arbitrarily out-group other people and those who are obdurate for the sake of maintaining an ideological identity.
Propaganda is still propaganda even if the views and message are both factually and morally correct.
It wasn’t a troll comment; it was earnestly pointing out a contradiction of values. It doesn’t make sense to demean falsehoods to one crowd and turn and peddle synthetic messages to another crowd. Just because something is or is not in a rule somewhere does not make it inherently right or wrong, and I spoke out against two things that I saw to be wrong.
Conversely, the pro-AI crowd should stop disrespecting their audience by cross-contaminating the feeds of real and zealous imitation. I will call a spade a spade and I will content that is lazy, impersonal, and manipulative to be lazy, impersonal, and manipulative (lazy content can still be good if done personally plus correctly). It’s neither respectful nor in good faith to an audience to expect them to be placated and content with a façade such as that. I’d rather the standard for content here not be degraded to such a value.
I genuinely don’t understand Rule 3’s relevance to this situation. It kind of just sounds like “If you’re not with me 100% then you’re against me 100%”?
I don’t need a reduced ban. As you may have inferred before, I didn’t plan to engage much with the community in the future anyway since it is uncomfortably dogmatic. The silencing I received to dissent also drove away any chance of me wanting to integrate with that particular in-group. I more so wanted to preserve the reaction of power when truth is spoken to it.
You’re allowed to not like stuff in a community. You’re allowed to express that displeasure. You’re also allowed to not enter or engage with a community that’s not aimed at you, and let other people enjoy the things they enjoy.
Propaganda is still propaganda even if the views and message are both factually and morally correct.
The whole point of lefty memes is to post (occasionally) entertaining leftist messages in a meme format for folks who appreciate them. Under your definition they would all be considered propaganda, even though they are clearly posted in a “Lefty Memes” community and factually accurate? I’d get your point if it was masquerading as a general memes community and we only allowed leftist content.
It wasn’t a troll comment; it was earnestly pointing out a contradiction of values.
You made a comment inferring “pirates” who use genAI are monsters. If that is a good faith comment, then I’d hate to see your bad faith comments.
It doesn’t make sense to demean falsehoods to one crowd and turn and peddle synthetic messages to another crowd.
Falsehoods? Synthetic messages? I saw the post, liked the message, and crossposted it to lefty memes. End of story. The rest is all happening in your head somewhere. Who or what originally created it is largely irrelevant to me because it’s a memes community, they are all copied from somewhere. I simply post or crosspost things I think the community will like and are aligned with leftist ideas.
YDI. Like others have said, we’re against copyright here.
Mmm, sorry. I agree in principle, but that was definitely outside of community rules.
That makes it YDI, even though it seems a permaban was issued. That could matter, because this could have been your first offense, and that’s a heavy handed action with no malice in the comment removed.
But if it isn’t your first offense, or it was compounded after the fact with comments, messages, or other events that exacerbate the original rule breaking, a permaban could be justified.
While I understand that the concept of responding to a meme with a meme being rule breaking is one that isn’t exactly clear in those rules, I believe that a reasonable person could tell that the meme used in response is one that is commonly used in a dismissive and/or condescending manner. The subject of the meme image, and the “irony” that meme conveys is not close to the line, it’s a pretty blunt put down.
Since it’s in meme form as well, it isn’t engaging, it’s just an offhand, smug response. Within the rules of that community, that is absolutely a removable comment.
I rarely do this, but I disagree with a lot of the established rules of that community, and have it blocked partially because of their specific rules and moderation policies. While that’s off topic for this community, I want to make it clear that I would, on an emotional response level, have preferred this be power tripping. But it just wasn’t.
Squorlple indeed has a long history of bad faith trolling, and Bad-jacketing. He should consider himself lucky he wasn’t given a permanent instance ban. I certainly would’ve had I been in charge of that descision and I can’t blame other people for having the same opinion. There’s only so much bullshit people can tolerate from someone before it’s clear that they’re 1. Never going to contribute anything in good faith, and 2. Never going to change. It’s why we have permanent bans in the first place.
Squorlple was banned from blahaj for reference of how bad faith they are.
Oh yeah I saw that, I almost forgot about that, not the best look for Squorlple…
Bad faith troll whines when someone catches them being a bad faith troll, news at 11.
Is criticizing the AI trend and its adopters in any manner always against db0/comm rules?
I posted two comments, one criticism and one a question to another commenter. None palpatine reaction images. Both were deleted.
YDI. It’s a leftist community. Stop brigading and read the rules.
Tell activitypub to stop putting db0 AI slop on my instance’s All front-page, then. It’s not brigading. If you don’t want interaction with the outside world, stop federating with it.
That’s not activitypub’s fault.
You can block the instance in settings, or block individual communities.
You need to use the block function instead of brigading communities and users who post AI content here. Activitypub services provide you with ways to stop seeing content you dislike in your communities. You’re choosing not to use it and instead complaining that the content exists, when it and the users who post it have more than every right to post it in this community.
If you are an instance admin you can choose not to federate with it but you aren’t, you’re a user. So either suck it up or block some people and communities.
I don’t think we’ll agree here, but it has to be said:
There is no brigade. You need to stop trying to redefine that term. There is no coordination, no plan, no private organizing. What you see is an entirely natural, decentralized reaction to an obnoxious and harmful trend.
You’re broadcasting, shouting at a megaphone, then blaming people who didn’t preemptively put earplugs in. You’re blaming people who have every right to use or not whatever platform features they wish and framing their disjointed actions as something else.
If you don’t like these reactions, you’re also free to stop seeing them. So maybe suck it up, or block some people? This argument sucks.
There is no brigade. You need to stop trying to redefine that term. There is no coordination, no plan, no private organizing. What you see is an entirely natural, decentralized reaction to an obnoxious and harmful trend.
This isn’t something you can deny or prove innocence of, as brigaders and astroturfers are known to lie about their intentions, but FYI by trying to deny the existence or nature of brigading you’ve already failed and made yourself look even more suspicious. They always are “individual opinions” or “grassroots movements” according to the ones participating but the proof is in the votes and comment history of the users, and yours doesn’t make you look particularly good.
The person you’re replying to might be telling the truth, no way to know, but this instance got a lot of negative interaction from an actual brigade earlier today, so I wouldn’t be surprised.
Yeah, I wouldn’t be either, there have been brigades for a while actually and all the brigaders claim they aren’t that it’s just “individual opinions”. It is hard to know definitively and that’s really what they use to not get caught. Even if some of the people I’ve banned aren’t technically brigaders I don’t feel bad about it since they were anti-AI trolls in the first place, they don’t get anything out of my community. None of them are innocent or have been. OP of this thread certainly also isn’t innocent.
Yeah, I saw that later. This is clearly a bigger problem than I knew until like… two hours ago. But! That’s just evidence that the mods and admins are doing a fantastic job!
Because I make no secret of my opinions and don’t filter what I interact with?
If I was part of a secret, AI-hating cabal, what the hell would I be doing here on a thread with like 50 interactions? This has got to be the least advantageous, least productive, most contrived way to further my goals: in the midst of “enemy turf,” with no support, getting downvoted and looking like a loser trying to explain what brigading isn’t.
There’s no pretty way to say this, but you’re acting like a conspiracy theorist.
I’m not denying the nature of brigades, I’m saying a lot of the internet hates the genAI trend, is extremely open about it, and that post hit All. This is the simplest explanation, which you’re saying isn’t the case despite having no actual evidence pointing otherwise. But merely trying to prove the obvious would feed into an apparent persecution complex.
If I stay quiet, you’re right, but if I talk you’re righter. Have a good day, I guess.
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.
- Being anti-AI is an intrinsically reactionary position to hold.
- Leftists should be trying to seize the means of production, not trying to destroy them.
- 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.
- 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?
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
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 removed about generative AI soon. I’m pretty torn on it, because I am so tired of people removed 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.
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.
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!
db0 is pro slop so ydi
it is kind of fucked that the post in question is a repost of a bot’s repost of a reddit post of ai shit. look at that pile behind him, is it supposed to be money or uno cards or fuckin what
but their instance their rules
Have you ever heard the expression “can’t see the forest for the trees”? I mean I like Marshall McLuhan and all, but if all you are talking about is the medium then you’ve kind of missed the whole point of the post, which was the message.
it is a fine message in itself but i am (probably? never read the book) with your mate marshall on this one, it is contaminated by the medium from the outset and the filtration through bot to man to bot to man has only debased it further
original (?) on /r/union https://old.reddit.com/r/union/comments/1kcsedt/please_remember_this/
version retrieved fom r/50501 https://old.reddit.com/r/50501/comments/1kd2onw/please_remember_this/
many top comments on both threads being slop, slop, shit, slop, etc. i’ve no love for reddit but i think they have the measure of it
pro trade union messages produced by anti trade union means are detrimental overall
still ydi as i said, i know this isn’t the instance to whine about gen ai
It does the community no good to allow anti ai warriors to start brigading every post containing so called “ai slop”. It’s just a new pointless diversion for keyboard warriors to fight over, accomplishing nothing in the process but derailing any meaningful discussion on the content of the OP. There are other ways to fight back against corporate power, such as making access to genAI technology free and open source, like db0s ai horde project.
disengage
Removed by mod
Don’t violate the disengage rule.
YDM. Go be an annoying liberal somewhere else and learn how to follow community/instance rules ❤️
