this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2025
-1 points (49.2% liked)

Unpopular Opinion

7771 readers
111 users here now

Welcome to the Unpopular Opinion community!


How voting works:

Vote the opposite of the norm.


If you agree that the opinion is unpopular give it an arrow up. If it's something that's widely accepted, give it an arrow down.



Guidelines:

Tag your post, if possible (not required)


  • If your post is a "General" unpopular opinion, start the subject with [GENERAL].
  • If it is a Lemmy-specific unpopular opinion, start it with [LEMMY].


Rules:

1. NO POLITICS


Politics is everywhere. Let's make this about [general] and [lemmy] - specific topics, and keep politics out of it.


2. Be civil.


Disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally attack others. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Please also refrain from gatekeeping others' opinions.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Shitposts and memes are allowed but...


Only until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.


5. No trolling.


This shouldn't need an explanation. If your post or comment is made just to get a rise with no real value, it will be removed. You do this too often, you will get a vacation to touch grass, away from this community for 1 or more days. Repeat offenses will result in a perma-ban.


6. Defend your opinion


This is a bit of a mix of rules 4 and 5 to help foster higher quality posts. You are expected to defend your unpopular opinion in the post body. We don't expect a whole manifesto (please, no manifestos), but you should at least provide some details as to why you hold the position you do.



Instance-wide rules always apply. https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I get why people don't like it, but when I scroll lemmy and see a post which looks like it has a decent level of engagements I'm finding an endless stream of replies that are always the same.

"Is this ai?" "Looks like it might be ai" "Ai slop" "This is ai, look at the [feature]"

Communities should set a rule to allow ai or not. Allowing ai but it must be declared could be a decent approach.

If there isn't a rule in the community that prohibits ai, I really wish people would cool it.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] PlasticExistence@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (2 children)

There are several reasons why people may be hesitant to see LLM-generated content on social media:

  • Authenticity Concerns: Users may feel that LLM-generated content lacks the personal touch and authenticity of human-created content.

  • Misinformation Risks: There is a fear that LLMs can produce misleading or false information, contributing to the spread of misinformation.

  • Quality Variability: The quality of LLM-generated content can be inconsistent, leading to frustration when users encounter poorly constructed or irrelevant posts.

  • Emotional Connection: People often seek emotional resonance in social media interactions, which can be absent in automated content.

  • Manipulation and Bias: Users may worry that LLMs reflect biases present in their training data, leading to skewed or harmful representations of certain topics.

  • Over-saturation: The potential for an overwhelming amount of automated content can dilute the value of genuine human interactions.

  • Privacy Concerns: Users might be concerned about how their data is used to train LLMs and the implications for their privacy.

  • Job Displacement: There may be anxiety about the impact of LLMs on jobs related to content creation and journalism.

  • Lack of Accountability: Users may feel that LLM-generated content lacks accountability, as it is not tied to a specific individual or source.

These concerns contribute to a general skepticism towards the integration of LLM-generated content in social media platforms.

[–] Luvs2Spuj@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Ironically, this reads like an LLM wrote it. That's also supported by the fact it hasn't really got much to do with what I said. I'm aware of the reasons why people may be hesitant to see ai content. I'm tired of people complaining and scrutinizing instead of anything being done to update community rules.

[–] PlasticExistence@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

Ironically, this reads like an LLM wrote it.

I thought it was super obvious that it did.

People don’t vote based on community rules. You should disabuse yourself of that notion.