"Anti-ai arguments literally support eugenics"

If you say the same bigoted arguments, you're like a bigot.

If you say the same terrorist arguments then you're like a terrorist.

Except, the people saying mean stuff about Trump are much less terroristic that trump supporters.

The forms are the same (it's the most basic sylogism in fact). The contents isn't, and the merits of antecedents matter.

Not only that, she introduced mass surveillance to Bluesky and is brainstorming further methods of such in response to getting clowned on so hard.

Well. 'Engineer'. You know it's all vibes to them.

And to think all this could have been solved by bsky simply hiring some communication specialists and treating the current events like a crisis, and acting like their users are the police.

Just complete the delusional circuit and tell them you can't be sure they aren't an AI, ask them how they would prove they aren't.

How do we have people wasting their time arguing about software having feelings when we haven’t even managed to convince the majority of people that fish and crabs and stuff can feel pain even though they don’t make a frowny face when you hurt them.

They are literally predictive algorithims if you have even a basic understadning of how LLMs work (not somethingalot of pro-ai people have) you'd know this is completely untrue. They do not have genuine thoughts they just say what it predicts the response would be based on previous sources.

Their argument is something like this:

People might say something like "ai is incapable of thinking" or "ai is stupid", but if you replace the word "ai" with something like "women", you're saying something unacceptable.

"chain in the sack" is one of my new favourite semi-nonsense phrases

I woudln't think that's healthy or okay behaviour either. Because a. like what are you even celebrating that hitler got to escape from justice for his crimes? that he got to go out on his own terms instead of on trial that seems liek a weird thing to celebrate if anything it makes you seem a like you sympathize with hitler. Hilter killed himself to evade capture because he knew he lost. The only reaosn youo'd celebrate that is becuase you wnat hitler to evade capture. Not to mention, being that obssessed over the deaht of smoeone who died 80 years ago is extremely unhealthy.

Oh, hey, that's the "Mikhail Gorbachev Caused Skibidi Toilet" guy

I think everyone can agree on "this is a slur that we took from StarWars to be derogatory and justify our distaste and opposition to genAI", it's just that some people think that's a bad thing?

Like it appears some people think using the n-word is bad because it's Bad™, not because there's an actual dehumanising effect on a group of people. What's your argument, that we're dehumanising Grok? Ye because it's not a human! "But if it was about the Jews it'd be bad" ye and if my grandmother had wheels she would have been a bike, what the fuck is your point?

As for the origins I also think it is very important that the word is "clanker" from StarWars, since their droids are not sentient, whereas both "toaster" and "skinjob" are actually used as a hateful term towards sentient beings. BSG goes out of its way to drive in the fact that genociding Cylons would also be bad, actually. The sentience of "skinjobs" is like the whole point of Blade Runner.

in every serious (ie not TikTok or any other right-wing or unmoderated hellhole) anti-AI community I know, bigotry gets you banned even if you’re trying to hide it behind nonsense words like a 12 year old

meanwhile the people who seem to have dreamt up the idea that AI critical spaces are full of masked bigotry appear to be mostly Neil Gaiman Warren Ellis (see replies), who has several credible sexual assault allegations leveled against him, and Jay Graber, bluesky’s CEO who deserves no introduction (search mastodon or take a look at bluesky right now if the name’s unfamiliar). I don’t trust either of those people’s judgement as to what harms marginalized people.

Any minimally competent critique of AI would make such bigotry ipso facto meaningless. Note that the cited phrase implicitly accepts the premise of “AIs” as being in the same category of sentient beings as humans by virtue of it being possible to betray the latter for the former, and hence for any genuinely AI-critical person, it makes about as much sense as talking about ‘anti-table bigotry’; it’s just a meaningless configuration of words if one understands what they mean.

from what i see, white people simply clamor for a context in which they're "allowed" to finally call someone the n-word, and are willing to accept substitute targets for their racism

add in a protective cloak of "it's ironic and a joke and YOU'RE the real racist for pointing this out" and you get a whole lot of people who are extremely okay slinging around barely modified racial slurs

I'm really sorry to say this, I'm sure you're a lovely person, but fuck out of here with all that bullshit.