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:

  • Eldritch@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    This may be a mistake. But I’m going to make an attempt at good faith discussion.

    I am 1000% anti bougie AI. And would be a proud Luddite, marching into the data centers with a hammer to smash the servers and power distribution. AI used to displace, exclude, or oppress people. Or AI that is a detriment to the environment. That is the problem.

    Or is it this community stance that all AI regardless of what it is or what it does is somehow bad. Say if you could run your own natural language AI assistant efficiently on a piece of hardware that you own. To help you stay organized or assist with simple verbal tasks. Is that also bad? Because otherwise everything @Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com said seems pretty reasonable.

    • rtxn@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      That is like saying that DDT can be used to exterminate malaria-carrying mosquitoes, therefore it should be unregulated and widely accessible and anyone saying otherwise is a ratlicker.

      • Eldritch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Not at all. Again I literally said I would happily go Luddite on the data centers of the bougie wealthy that would use a tool like artificial intelligence to harm or oppress people and the environment. That’s literally a form of Regulation against the negative impacts. If a tool can exist without the negative impacts. Then where is the problem?

        • rtxn@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          If a tool can exist without the negative impacts.

          If.

          The problem (at least one of the problems) is the assumption that such an AI tool can exist without negative impacts. I am convinced that it can’t, because I’m witnessing the negative impacts in real time as the intelligence and competence of students at the university I work at declines year over year, to the point where some of them can’t even take a multiple choice test or write a dozen lines of code without the assistance of a chatbot.

          Can AI tools have massively positive impacts? Absolutely. So can nuclear power, and we’ve done a remarkable job (so far) of not foisting a ton of refined plutonium upon whichever trust fund baby techbro grifter promises to save the world if they are given a billion dollars to build a death star.

          Ethical AI cannot exist in this world, and the world where it can is a fantasy.


          I should clarify: I am 100% in favor of nuclear energy and technology, and part of the reason is that the modern nuclear industry is so heavily regulated and safety-conscious. If it presented the same callous attitude as AI techbros and corporations, my views would shift immediately.