AI content on moopy - do we need or want to adopt a community policy/approach? (1 Viewer)

the AI-ification of moopy

  • Total voters
    30
Jark

Jark

PLUMP and RIPE
Joined
Oct 27, 2007
Messages
59,221
...has been creeping up a lot lately I've noticed. the other forum I'm on has a no AI policy which is moderated, and I think is better for it.

personally I fucking hate AI and don't want to see it on moopy, but I'm curious to know where the community stands as a whole - and whether without the AI Enya topics we would have any reason to exist at all. so please vote :)
 
I don't really care. It's here to stay. I wish it wasn't but it's there.

Actual slop that pretends to be anything else, or A.I. passed off as art does my tits in. We don't really have the shiny rainbow dog art on here.

I understand the threat to humanity and water supplies, but I find it incredibly useful, for all sorts of things, least of all my mental health.

In a world where Google is about as functional as using a croissant as a dildo, it's at least answerable.
 
Those voting for "we should have a policy" - what do you propose exactly?
 
Unless AI is being used to depict Enya doing saucy things to a Pokémon, the offending member should be BOILED IN ACID

(But that aside, like Ag, I've not yet noticed it being prolific across the board. Unless the evil Mr Pop has been a chatbot all along?)
 
I’m not AGAINST some sort of policy but I find the “Post an AI picture of …” provides (selective) comedic value at least.
 
I just think moopy would not be a worse place without AI pics of Enya and should probably take a stance. I don't think it's prolific across the forum but it has been creeping in - not just pics but random shit from chatgpt in the comedic/spammy threads that's invariably not funny. I don't like where it's seemingly headed.
 
Yeah, I think AI threads are fine to stay, can be blocked easily enough if they're not your thing.

I definitely think we should encourage not deliberately sharing AI outside of that unless there is good reason.

Probably better as a norm we fall into rather than a top down rule or policy though.
 
Fuck AI and fuck the "It's inevitable" attitude.

I despise it and in case some people haven't noticed, it's massively detrimental to the environment.
 
Could we bully people by slapping a “THIS IS AI SLOP” label when people post shit AI images outside of the threads?
 
actually most of the online spaces I use have clearly defined policies on this so I think moopy (as ever) is quite a way behind. for example I regularly look at 2-3 different subreddits and all have banned anything AI a year or two ago. I understand some people think it's not really a big deal but it kind of is the biggest deal globally right now and shouldn't get a free pass here just cos we're a small community where sometimes it's used ironically.
 
I'm not encouraging A.I., use it or don't I don't care. I mostly hate it, but occasionally enjoy it.

But it is absolutely inevitable. Neither you nor I can stop the rot.
 
Jark said:
why? we have rules and take stances on many things.
Click to expand...
I don't think there is a clear and easy place to draw a line, especially when there are plenty of legitimate times people will want to post AI that for example, is newsworthy or in the ether (politicians using it to create videos, songs in the charts etc) so I don't think it's worth getting in the weeds of a proper rule for it.
 
Agneeta said:
But it is absolutely inevitable. Neither you nor I can stop the rot.
Click to expand...
this is something more existential for the bigger AI topic we have, but I don't agree. entire industries can choose not to adopt it. small businesses can choose not to use the useless fucking AI recruitment and productivity softwares being foisted on them. everybody has a choice at this stage. there is massive pushback.
 
My personal view is that we should stand as a progressive forum and ban pro-genocide, pro-Trump, anti-trans fuckers etc, but I understand that's not how this chat lounge works.

I hated gifs back in the day, but we all moved on.
 
The Enya thread doesn't overly offend me in that it's very clearly labelled, not pretending in any way to be creative, is very clearly taking the piss, and most importantly is entirely self-contained.

AI shit creeping into general topics would be a totally different problem, and I'd totally vote for that being policed with capital punishment.
 
Jark said:
actually most of the online spaces I use have clearly defined policies on this so I think moopy (as ever) is quite a way behind. for example I regularly look at 2-3 different subreddits and all have banned anything AI a year or two ago.
Click to expand...
It’s worth exploring considering the reason behind these kind of bans though. Like - on the subreddits you mention, is it to combat misinformation, a moral stance related to the environmental impact as some on this thread appear to hold, or just a distaste for the shit laziness of the content in general?

I feel like if Moopy is taking a stance there needs to be a clear reasoning that a majority of posters agree with that sits behind the policy.
 
Jark said:
this is something more existential for the bigger AI topic we have, but I don't agree. entire industries can choose not to adopt it. small businesses can choose not to use the useless fucking AI recruitment and productivity softwares being foisted on them. everybody has a choice at this stage. there is massive pushback.
Click to expand...
There's also a tremendous amount of people who use it. And as for industry - in this climate I doubt many businesses are going reject the time and money saving that a relatively small subscription costs.

I understand your fear (and agree with it), but some pushback is barely going to effect this particular tide.

If anything a conversation like this is normally enough to give people direction ongoing. We're a smart bunch, we don't need policy.
 
Tetris-Rock said:
It’s worth exploring considering the reason behind these kind of bans though. Like - on the subreddits you mention, is it to combat misinformation, a moral stance related to the environmental impact as some on this thread appear to hold, or just a distaste for the shit laziness of the content in general?

I feel like if Moopy is taking a stance there needs to be a clear reasoning that a majority of posters agree with that sits behind the policy.
Click to expand...
as far as I can tell, a moral stance
 
Of course Reddit bans it. It's the biggest forum in the world and they have a responsibility to pushback against misinformation. We don't really hold that same position.
 
Agneeta said:
If anything a conversation like this is normally enough to give people direction ongoing. We're a smart bunch, we don't need policy.
Click to expand...
I think moopy has shown many times over that this is not necessarily true at all... but I take what you're saying.
 
I'll happily comply with whatever people decide, policy or no policy.

But moral conviction is not a good argument for a policy, in my opinion. Because it's not producing any kind of measurable benefit other than satisfying your personal beliefs, which some share and some don't.

A much better argument for a Moopy AI policy would be the very real environmental impact. How much AI content do we post? And how significant is Moopy's environmental damage? Perhaps we can have an AI quota?
 
I believe Moopy should be...

1000061110.jpg
 
For starters, "banning AI" is a vague, broad concept. If you use tools like Grammarly, you're using AI. Are we anti spell check now?

That said, I'm all for rejecting AI slop. I get it, it's possible to create something funny. I even used ChatGPT to create an image for a shitposting group a couple of weeks ago.

But I'm also cognisant that the ubiquitous use of genAI, trained on unpaid for creative work and using vast amounts of resources, is problematic as fuck. I saw a headline this morning that the US is vastly outpacing China in building new gas-burning power plants to power datacenters.

I still remain bullish about AI as a broad concept. It can and will be used in many spectacular, humanity-changing ways that will be positive. I'm not anti-AI, and I don't think you can ban it. But I do think that as a community we should discuss some guidelines as well. Personally, I don't see the value in a thread full of slop that mostly serves as a private dumping ground for one poster, what benefit does moopy gain from this other than a vastly larger amount of hosting space being used up (at a cost to us)
 
I asked Chat GPT if we should ban AI on Moopy and it said pretty much I would let Gemma know that she is a fat cunt and, um the shoes that she gave me were not something that I would particularly buy for myself. They were old maiden type of shoes, and she said that those shoes were meant to be worn on a beautiful woman. So if that is the case she should have put them back on the rack and she should never even purchased them because she was UNQUALIFIED to own those shoes if that's the case and, um I think that Gemma is just a disgrace. She's a disgrace to women who are actually beautiful and classy and, um she just doesn't have the vernacular she thinks she possesses. Somebody lied to her several times and told her that she was fly, hot and sexy and beautiful and she's nothing like that She's nothing of the sort.
 
I just find it a little odd to actively encourage it in some threads because it amuses us/ some of us, but then be so hardline anti it elsewhere. To me it feels inconsistent.
 
lolly said:
I just find it a little odd to actively encourage it in some threads because it amuses us/ some of us, but then be so hardline anti it elsewhere. To me it feels inconsistent.
Click to expand...
To be fair, most of the threads for posting AI like that were started a few years ago when we saw it more as a toy and a novelty. Most of us now seem a lot more hesitant to use AI for frivolous shit (quite rightly imo), if not hesitant to use it at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top Bottom