drascus

We are already headed to this point but just imagine: In the future you get some answer from AI and you want to see if it's true. Where would you check? Ask another AI or the same AI if it's right? I can just see a potential future where AI could pretty much tell us anything and we would have way to know if it's right or not.

After just seeing so many articles of people being sad I really just have to say the pope was an asshole. You don't even have to do good research to see that this guy and his administration was still hiding pedophiles, hating gay people, and generally being a jerk all while pretending he was better than everyone else. The only thing he did was say he loved everyone and be a nice guy on camera which literally anyone could pretend to do. Meanwhile his administration was just more of the same shit. Just creating some counterpoint to the nonsense narrative I keep seeing.

I have noticed that lemmy so far does not have a lot of fake accounts from bots and AI slop at least from what I can tell. I am wondering how the heck do we keep this community free of that kind of stuff as continuous waves of redditors land here and the platform grows.

EDIT a potential solution:

I have an idea where people can flag a post or a user as a bot and if it's found out to be a bot the moderators could have some tool where the bot is essentially shadow banned into an inbox that just gets dumped occasionally. I am thinking this because then people creating the bots might not realize their bot has been banned and try and create replacement bots. This could effectively reduce the amount of bots without bot creators realizing it or know if their bots have been blocked or not. The one thing that would also be needed is a way to request being un-bannned if they get hit as a false positive. these would have to be built into lemmy's moderation tools and I don't know if any of that exists currently.

Dell has got to be one of the most frustrating companies that put out a linux laptop. They put out a laptop certified for ubuntu but then never support newer releases. A big part of their hardware is always proprietary drivers like webcam, fingerprint reader etc.. Then you update to a new LTS release because lets be serious 20.04 at this point is going to sunset in a couple of years... However after you update the webcam stops working, or some other hardware stops working. Then you are constantly troubleshooting to get it working and every kernel update it breaks again. If you ever did ask support they will just tell you to go back to 20.04 image from dell. Not to mention all their OS tools are made for windows even the ones for making linux recovery images... like WTF! I am two years in on this laptop and I am just getting rid of it I cannot put up with this nonsense anymore from them.

My current view is that while I want to promote openness and free speech that can really only work in a context where the person exercising their speech feels some necessity to use it responsibly and in an honest way.

On the internet that takes a lot of self control because the social norms of every day life don’t always apply because:

• no one knows who you are
• there is not a human being right in front of you that you might feel empathy for
• there are no consequences to anything you say
• not all posts are even by humans.

With all these taken together there is a compelling argument that speech may need to be more highly regulated on the internet than in face to face interactions. However there are people with legitimate ( beliefs and ideas honestly held that they wish to discuss ) views that I worry are going to be silenced and further marginalized.

This is bad for society because if people get dismissed or pushed aside it just breeds resentment, distrust, and more misunderstanding. I think as we start defederating and making decisions we are setting up a dangerous situation where it becomes potentially easy to defederate for the wrong reasons.

For instance "we think they are being racist" or "they are spreading misinformation" could have unintended consequences. Some religions and communities might have beliefs that appear to be pseudoscience or even discrimination. However if these are honestly held beliefs that they are willing to engage in civil discourse around I don't think it's right to actually block them.

This is likely just the beginning of a much larger discussion so what are your thoughts?---

So on the home page it defaults to local. When I hover my mouse it says that it shows local communities only. However when I look at the feed there is definitely posts from communities that are not local. So I have no idea what this actually does.

In this blog post I explore Reddit's downfall and my search for something to replace it. I'm finding no perfect solutions but lots of interesting pieces of a solution.