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:

  • haverholm@kbin.earth
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    60
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 day ago

    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.

    • go $fsck yourself@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      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.

      • haverholm@kbin.earth
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        1 day ago

        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.