If any significant number of community members are opposed to this, we can discuss it further.
Judging by the reactions to the recently-posted, now-removed NMS AI content, it seems it’s generally poorly-received and people (including me) would prefer it not to be featured in this community.
You must log in or register to comment.
I’m fine with that.
Sorry I don’t post more, I’ll work on that. :)
No worries! I think this community is doing just fine. But of course we’d welcome more posts from you too 🖖🏻
I’m in two minds… I don’t want a bunch of low-effort junk, but this community has pretty much no content at all.
It doesn’t seem right to ban it just because AI helped to produce it, or produced it entirely. I know this is an unpopular opinion on Lemmy. I just don’t think it’s a clear cut case of “AI was involved so it’s bad”
My take on AI use is that because it’s being used to try and replace skilled labor using it, and therefore helping to train it, is bad in most cases. If it were the case that it was not being used that way than I’d have no issues with it.
Why not just, no crappy content? People are far too butthurt about AI stuff.
Because crappy human content is still human.
Also because “crappy” is subjective whereas “created by AI” is objective.
Right, but my point was that not all AI content is actually bad, no matter how much so many people would like to see it that way.
So by adopting a rule like this, the community is robbed of any good content because of bad content that is generated the same way? Seems like lazy moderating.
not all AI content is actually bad
I disagree, and judging by the -10 points on the only AI content ever posted here, it seems others do as well. If you find a compelling example of AI content which wouldn’t be widely detested, maybe we could make an exemption if the community agrees with you.
Seems like lazy moderating.
I have no problem being lazy at an unpaid job, so my advice on that front is to suck it up.
I find it interesting that you brought this subject up for discussion but you seem to not actually be interested in discussing it and rather just shitting on AI content. Which is fine, I don’t really have a horse in this race as I’m not subbed here and don’t really care for NMS that much. But just know that you are a lazy disingenuous person from where I’m sitting.
Bad moderating.
Judging by the multitude of posts on your profile praising AI, I think what you really mean is, “Moderating which doesn’t conform to my biases and is therefore bad.”
Judging by this rule announcement receiving an overwhelmingly positive reaction, I think the majority of this community does not share in your bias. “Bad moderating” would be disregarding the actual will of the community.
And on that note, you seem to have never contributed to this, or any other, No Man’s Sky community so I’m going to write your opinion off as irrelevant.
Its a meme of an ideology to combat ai for its own sake, and that appears to be what this is about given your responses to the original commenter.
It makes sense to combat ai in this community if it creates a lot of bad content. Curious how much ai content you’ve successfully identified, or if you would allow content that was aided by ai but then further developed.
Just doesnt seem super enforceable, and it doesnt really make sense to me. The low effort raw prompt output is one thing, ai all together is another.
Okay, then it’s “a meme” which the vast majority of this community would like to see enforced as a rule. That changes nothing.
If we can’t tell it’s AI, then don’t worry about it! (Everyone can always tell.)
It doesn’t need to make sense to you. You aren’t active in this community. This post was specifically to solicit the opinions of community members, which you are not. Thus your opinion was not solicited and is not desired. (And yes, this is the internet, you can offer it anyway, if you’re into wasting your time.)
If a single post with ten downvotes necessitates such a paradigm shift then by all means.
So is the rule going to say “no ai, unless we cant tell”? Or are you going to leave that up to interpretation?
I’m fine with that.
