Summary:
I downvoted pro-AI comments in a post in leftymemes community. It was LLM generated polandball comic (Which is objectively pathetic as fuck) that showed up on my feed, blocked couple of users who I thought were unhinged, and have blocked the whole instance on my client after realizing how rabid these morons are.
I didn’t go looking for AI posts like a vigilante.
One user in question got miffed for being downvoted and banned me from places they moderate.
My dude. That’s voting. If everyone organically decides to not like a post, they can downvote.
Briggading is the very specific case of organizing a bunch of users from one forum together to downvote something on another.
If you don’t like AI posts, then you shouldn’t be on pro-AI communities. That’d be like an atheist downvoting everything on c/christianity (which is probably not a thing) or vice versa, a religious person downvoting everything on c/atheism. If you fundamentally disagree with what a space stands for, then your vote is indistinguishable from brigading.
Like downvoting posts in a nazi community just because they promote genocide. If you don’t like genocide, then just ignore the community and let them enjoy their thing!
Some people actually believe that generated images of witches is not nearly as bad as genocide. They believe the two ideologies should be treated differently. Can you believe that? Shocking!
… Are you fucking kidding me?
You’re the one who made that argument. You just don’t like when your own logic is used consistently.
No, I don’t like it when AI generated mushrooms are compared to Nazism. Nazis cause harm to people by spouting their Nazi ideas, so they deserve to be downvoted to hell (or, more appropriately, banned completely), while AI mushrooms don’t, so they don’t.
Hayao Miyazaki called generative AI “an insult to life itself”. You’re saying people should vote on communities they don’t agree with the purpose of if it’s a serious issue, but not if it’s not important. I, and many others, have a serious disagreement with the use of generative AI. It’s bad for society, it’s bad for our culture, it’s bad for our politics, it’s bad for the environment, and it’s bad for the AI.
I never said anything about seriousness; I said harm. Whatever the harms of AI are, people posting AI witches aren’t harming anyone. There are examples of pro-AI content that’s okay to downvote on that principle, such as if Lemmy had a community called “fuck AI legislation” or something, but posting AI art is a fundamentally harmless act* (though I do think it’s pointless).
*Technically it does harm the environment, but in that case do you have the same reaction to car communities? What about cooking communities where people cook meat? Your enemy isn’t your fellow workers; it’s the rich pricks making these tools and abusing them en masse.
Yes, and you should too. And AI art shouldn’t be culturally legitimised. We shouldn’t be used to seeing it, and being okay with seeing it. It should be taboo.
That’s the promblem. Your analogy is flawed because OP and others like them (I copped a ban for my participation in that thread) had no reasonable way of knowing in advance that c/leftymemes is a pro-AI community. It didn’t say anything about it in the community rules at the time, and it’s only when people reacted negatively to someone posting an AI image and the mods cracked down that we found out.
I don’t, and I assume OP also does not, go around commenting in comms for genAI content. If I see one in my feed, I just block it. It just wasn’t really knowable that c/leftymemes is a genAI comm.
Lefty memes isn’t pro AI (though they’re not exactly anti-AI either); I saw the bans and thought they were downvoting stuff on the communities in the mod log. Also OP was in flippanarchy (which also isn’t explicitly pro, though also not anti, AI), not lefty memes. It seems the mod banned OP from their comms on their pejorative, at least with the information we have. I edited the parent comment to that effect.