this post was submitted on 28 Aug 2025
35 points (94.9% liked)

Actual Discussion

1108 readers
1 users here now

Are you tired of going into controversial threads and having people not discuss things, circlejerking, or using emotional responses in place of logic? Us too.

Welcome to Actual Discussion!

DO:

DO NOT:

For more casual conversation instead of competitive ranked conversation, try: !casualconversation@piefed.social

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

There is a book called “On Being Certain”, by Robert A Burton who’s a neurologist, discussing how we know what we know. He postulates that the sense of “conviction” has less to do with objective reality and far more to do with “a feeling of knowing.” He also suggests that we are far less self-aware than we think we are.

People see a different viewpoint and their body reactively brings up all the conditioning received from popular advice. Instinctively, they hit the downvote button, thinking that they are rightfully decreasing the noise of a dangerous idea and protecting the less aware.

Most people aren’t interested in debate nor challenging the reality they find themselves in, or even the framing and interpretation of that reality.

Is lemmy supposed to be better then other social media?

How do we make lemmy a more thoughtful place? Or how do we create meaningful spaces on lemmy for thoughtful discussion of opposing views?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] jet@hackertalks.com 8 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Yeah, the anti-ai people seem to be quite emotional in spreading their hate, even when it makes sense to use algorithms to do something (like identify cancer cells in imaging)

We need a place on lemmy that doesn't reward the knee jerk emotional takes. Do you think its possible to make such a place here? if not, what would we require?

[–] Washedupcynic@lemmy.ca 10 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

AI can absolutely be helpful and beneficial, but AI is only as good as the data it's fed, and the humans programming it. As someone that is anti-AI this is the crux of any argument I make about AI. I don't hate AI, but I do think adopting it blanket wide in every facet of our lives is dangerous. If you create a community that suppresses opposition to AI, even if you think they are emotional responses, you're just creating an echo chamber.

[–] jet@hackertalks.com 6 points 2 weeks ago

The goal is how to create a place for meaningful discussion, so how can we both have sentiment but still room for nuance?

[–] scintilla@crust.piefed.social 6 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Well it would help if the type if AI you are talking about was the one that the "anti-AI" people were talking about but it's not. Gen AI is not what is being used to find cancer cells.

[–] jet@hackertalks.com 3 points 2 weeks ago

A good discussion on a topic should include drawing the line between machine learning, generative models, markov chains, self-weighting matrices, and other general algorithms.

The issue is not that people dislike something, its that they disrupt other conversations on topics in a effort to suppress the discussion or chill participation.

[–] Valmond@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

There are lots of people who use generative AI for good things, so what about that? I mean there are lots of bad stuff like IP theft, energy usage etc, but there are also positive sides, that's why it'd be interesting to hear everyone out IMO. And it's not like it's going away just because some are angry about it.

It's like electric cars, great but uses rare earth minerals, nuclear, plastics, almost nothing is either black or white.

Or so I think.

[–] scintilla@crust.piefed.social 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Its always really interesting how people say this and can list examples of the negatives but never bring up examples of the positives because they know that people will start arguing over wether or not they are really positive. Or if you really need generative AI to accomplish the goal they are using it for.

Also not let's not ignore that gen AI is reversing the little climate progress we have made in the last few years. Let's also not ignore that it has caused multiple people to undergo psychosis. Multiple people have killed themselves after being encouraged to do so by AI. The world has been made actively worse by the advent of wide spread gen AI that is being subsidized by the public who has no say in the matter.

[–] Valmond@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago

That's all fair points, I like the one about "why can't you do it without AI?!" Maybe I can but it's easier with?

Where do you get the "ai has reversed the little climate progress we have made"? If you have a link I'd be very interested because the energy consumption of (generative) AI seems to be all over the place and no one really knows for sure.

But a little critic ; when I was a kid, heavy metal "killed". Should we stop all medications because sometimes they kill (they do)? What about knives, cars and alcohol (and for the USA, guns :-)?

Everything is good and bad, well there are very few exceptions.

[–] cloudless@piefed.social 4 points 2 weeks ago

You can create a community in PieFed, it has options to allow only community members to down vote:

I could be wrong but I don't think Lemmy has this feature.