35
My AI Skeptic Friends Are All Nuts
(fly.io)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 03 Jun 2025
35 points (88.9% liked)
Technology
1134 readers
56 users here now
A tech news sub for communists
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
My point is that you should've edited the title if you saw that the content of the article is interesting, but its headline is clearly antagonistic. There is no reason to adopt the author's callousness.
How you believe that starting off a conversation by implying that people who disagree with you are "nuts", even if it's the authors words, won't lead to people taking issue with it, as they should, is odd.
Why not simply acknowledge that there is a better way to have these conversations, that we could all learn and move forward and stop antagonising each other instead of doubling down on defending this?
I didn't give the headline any thought, and it seems you're projecting an intention to antagonize onto it. My sole aim was to share the piece because of its interesting content.
I agree that it's always best when conversations can proceed constructively and without unintended antagonism. However, it's also true that those who are critical of LLMs have made similar replies to posts with titles that couldn't possibly be considered antagonistic.
To sum it up, let's "be the change we wish to see." If people make polite and constructive comments, we can have civil discussions. If people engage in sealioning or leave snarky comments, that will inevitably set a different tone for the discussion.
At the end of the day, if people aren't interested in a particular topic, they can simply choose not to comment, rather than actively trying to antagonize others and then claiming victimhood.
You seem insistent to believe that I am attempting to troll, be snarky or engage in sealioning, when I am trying my best to genuinely engage. I did not, and do not claim that you had any bad intentions. If you follow through my comments again, you will see what my motivation was clearly. I simply started commenting to point out that, even if it is unintentional, and I do believe you when you say that it was, that given the context and history of these posts in this instance, this topic should be discussed with more grace. Nothing more, nothing less.
I'm not just referring to you specifically here. I'm pointing out the general tone of people who come into these threads complaining about AI. It's practically never constructive, and it's always the same set of talking points that have been addressed many times here. It's worth noting the tone of your original comment though:
You attack me for not editing the original title of the post claiming I was being antagonistic, yet you very clearly made a snide personal attack in your first comment. Then you pretend like you're the paragon of civility and I'm being unreasonable. Maybe get off your high horse, and reflect on the way you engage with people?
I'm not trying to portray myself as a paragon of civility, nor am I above making bad judgements. I do concede that that comment I made was poorly worded and needlessly antagonistic. I will not try to defend that.
I am not trying to debate or argue. I don't want any winners or losers or gotchas or whatever people seek from that. My whole aim was to express that there is frustration that is not unwarranted in these topics, and whether it's deemed to be fair or not, the initial invitation to a conversation is important in setting the ground for the conversations that follow.
What you are currently doing to Yogthos is a known nasty troll tactic called tone policing.
For clarity for the rest of the people in thread, Tone policing is a tactic to dismiss the ideas being communicated and is aimed at the tone of a disagreement, instead of looking at the facts or logic of the content.
Do better, NotMushroomForDebate.
Tone policing is something that is applicable to certain contexts where it is used to suppress criticisms of oppressive systems. I am more than familiar with tone policing, coming from a marginalised community myself. Applying the term to something like the conversation here does nothing but dilute its meaning.
I doubt you are familiar with this. Otherwise, you will know full well how annoyingly painful is for chuds/liberals to dismiss your main arguments and go for "Awww YoUr X words Offend mE". Also, it is ironic that you are doing it to others when you "say" that you are from a marginalized community.
On the contrary, it applies perfectly to this context without any dilution. Well, just like the saying goes, when education is not liberating the dream of the oppressed is to be the oppressor. This phrase fits you perfectly.
If you're going to be doubting someone's experience, assuming intentions, and implying that conversations surrounding oppression and disagreements over technological implementations are comparable in this sense, then there is no room for conversation here.
You expressed yourself so clearly throughout this thread that your intent is to be a manipulative troll that loves being dismissive and I called you out for it. You could have actually produce a better conversation throughout this thread but chose to resort to some petty trolling. Shameful...