I get why people don’t like it, but when I scroll lemmy and see a post which looks like it has a decent level of engagements I’m finding an endless stream of replies that are always the same.
“Is this ai?” “Looks like it might be ai” “Ai slop” “This is ai, look at the [feature]”
Communities should set a rule to allow ai or not. Allowing ai but it must be declared could be a decent approach.
If there isn’t a rule in the community that prohibits ai, I really wish people would cool it.
Removed by mod
I agree 100% that there is a privacy risk for services like ChatGPT, but this does not have anything to do with AI itself and the same concern exists for non-AI services. Instead it is a problem inherent to using internet based services and sharing information on them.
The privacy concern can be entirely resolved by running AI models locally offline.
EDIT: an argument could be made that the absurdly vast amount of training data required to create AI models encourages data collection and privacy violations, and that is a problem inherent to AI. I’d accept that.
it also buries legit content
imagine if majority of cat pictures were ai slop
No I’m not upset about that. I’m upset that this is taking over the majority of the discussion here and the way I worded that is that I’m beginning to find it tiresome. I’m unsure why communities don’t choose a stance so people can go to the ones that ban ai and go back to talking about beans and moths or whatever.
Ai slop should be tagged and left in the slop buckets dedicated to it.
If you like AI you can go check out the buckets. Not the other way around.
You hate ai, yet don’t want to prohibit it in the communities you subscribe to?
Surely adding rules to the community is the best way forward here.
Every community that’s not dedicated to Ai should ban it, yes.
Even only a few months ago this would be a reasonable demand, but AI image generation is getting better, faster and faster. Ask any moderator or anyone who has seriously discussed HOW to single out what is and isn’t AI created. Usually the consensus is the best anyone can do is ask for reports of suspicion and voluntary marking by the poster. Sure, some of the inferior is obvious, but a tag or ban should be thorough and not miss any, right? Otherwise such efforts are only catching the low fruit and letting the better AI pass because of ignorance. So rather than say “just tag/ban it”, explain how one does that without sliding into the trap that those who wanted to ban porn did with the “I’ll know it when I see it”. What is a solid universal indication of AI images?
I don’t think the objectors in this thread understand the point of the post. AI isn’t the topic, the constant claims of AI slop to anything someone doesn’t like is. Be nice if there was a “No AI material” button to apply, but it is not that easy to do, even when things are “obvious”.