▪️🚿👩‍🚒🚒

I am a Jew. Free Palestine!

Bots could be used to spam LLM comments, but users can effectively act as a manual bot with a LLM assisting them.

There really is no LLM detector yet.

Unless the prompter goes out of their way to obfuscate the text manually, which sort of defeats the purpose, they tend to be very samey. The generated text would stand out if multiple users were using the same or even similar prompts. And OPs stands out even without the admission.

edit: to clarify I mean stand out to the human eye, human mods would have to be the ones removing the comments

The issue is the scale. One comment can be fact checked in under an hour. Thousands not so much.

Also, it’s not purely about accuracy. I want to be having discussions with other humans. Not software.

Thanks for bringing this up to the group, I appreciate it! edit: typo

I’ve got three arguments for you on why you should make a rule against LLM comments, even those publicly marked as AI. And I’m going to refer to AI as LLM because large language models are what we are dealing with here.

First, LLMs aren’t a reliable source of information, especially for recent events. They regurgitate training data based on weights calibrated during training. These weights are used to create results that, especially for numbers, can look accurate for the topic but still be the wrong number. For recent events, they will lack the relevant data because it won’t have been in the data set they were trained on. So until that data is added in, the LLMs are giving an answer to something they don’t know, for lack of a better phrasing. These are commonly known limitations of the LLMs we are discussing.

If people start using LLMs to argue then the comments sections are going to be filled with pages of made up LLM garbage. LLMs will generate more misinformation than anyone can keep up with to debunk. Especially when misinformation could do the most damage like in the weeks leading up to the special election this November 4th in California.

I find it unlikely that all of the statistics listed, without sources, by the LLM are accurate. But regardless of that, if a user was to respond by taking that comment and putting it in a LLM it’s not likely that the LLM would be able to keep those numbers consistent. These errors would compound the longer the discussion went on between two LLMs.

At best this all wastes peoples’ time and lemmy becomes an extension of the misinformation LLM machine. At worst this becomes an attack vector for bad actors. Bad actors fill up comment sections with LLM discussions that promote one view point and bury the rest. Knowing the comments are LLM generated doesn’t solve these problems on its own.

Second, we shouldn’t want to automate thinking. Tools are supposed to save time while retaining agency. My laptop saves me the time of having to send you a letter in the mail and having to wait for the response. My laptop doesn’t deny me agency when it does this. I get to decide what I value and how that is communicated to you. The LLM saved OP’s time, if all OP wanted was text that looks correct at a glance, but it removed OP’s agency to think.

Facts and data, purportedly accurate, are assembled into a structure to deliver a central point, but none of that is done with the agency of OP. It’s not the OP’s thoughts or values being delivered to any of us. It’s not even a position held for the sake of a debate. This is the LLM regurgitating the position it received in the prompt in the affirmative, because that’s what the LLMs we have access to do. Like shouting into a cave and getting the echo back out.

We aren’t getting what we want faster with LLM content, we are being denied it. The LLM takes away our ability to have a discussion with each other. Anyone using an LLM to think for them is by definition not participating in the discussion. No one can have a conversation, argument, or debate with this OP because despite OP having commented OP didn’t write it. For lack of a better analogy, I might as well have a discussion with a parrot.

What are we doing on this website if we are all going to roll out our LLMs and have them talk to each other for us? We can all open two windows, position them side by side, and copy and paste prompts back and forth without needing a decentralized social media website as the middle man. The goal of social media and lemmy is to talk to other people.

Third, do you really want to volunteer to moderate LLM content? ChatGPT prose gets repetitive and it can never come up with anything new. I would not want to be stuck reading that all day.

Off by one error I could believe if the articles are displayed through an array and not a purely plain text in a div. Off by two error I think not.

And your argument is a comically reductionist one that calls literally anyone you don’t agree with a fascist and calls for them to be silenced.

Read my argument.

Your argument is a pro-fascist accelerationist ad hominen.

for supporting a left-wing party

Which party is that? In the US, we have a neoliberal party we should vote for, the Democrats, and a fascist party that needs to lose, the Republicans. I’m arguing we should vote for the Democrats. This meme is arguing there is no hope and that we should all give up and die. That’s accelerationist bullshit. We should all live no matter our flaws. edit: typo

Some people do though. I’ve seen and debunked the facebook posts.

I was talking in terms of the median voter.

Well I agree with you that is stupid. But that doesn’t mean the meme itself is wrong, a stopped clock and all that.

Lol. It’s good to know people upvoted this meme because they misunderstood it.

I may not agree with OP’s strategy, but I understand it. Biden was a ghoul. Harris was a ghoul. It made me sick to vote for them. That doesn’t make me pro-fascist.

You don’t have to like Democrats. I don’t.

Well, when you feel the need to preface your argument with

jfc. This isn’t intended as a “fascists on both sides” argument, but

then

you really need to take a moment and look at yourself there.

The fascists want to kill me and people I care about.

Your argument is a pro-fascist accelerationist ad hominen. Accelerationism is self-defeating. We should ban accelerationist posts and comments.

It’s not about what Republicans care about. It’s about controlling the narrative. The popular vote is a tool that can be used to control the narrative. The popular vote is useful and so voting even if it only contributes to the popular vote is still useful. And of course if enough people don’t vote then any state is in play.

The OP publicly claimed to not have voted for Harris. Reform in the meme is referring to the kind of strategies we are proposing. Look at the OP’s post and comment history if you don’t believe me.

I’ve been paying attention and OP worked tireless to sink Harris and Walz during the last election. It wasn’t criticism, OP just wanted them to fail. The OP doesn’t want the Democrats to improve. The OP wants us to hurry up and all die. That’s the madness of accelerationism.

Thank you!

🫶

Those wins are we how we got gay marriage. After decades of activism queer people won rights. It took time and effort and consistently turning out for elections. And a ton of shifting the culture through the media people consumed. But the voting is a mechanical necessity to bring that result about. There’s no way around it. We need to vote for the furthest left Democrats we can.

Add a /s please to jokes like that, my heart needs it

The accelerationists unironically believe that!

Harris wanted to end the war. So option 1 is better than your argument has advertised. Harris was a huge improvement over Biden in that regard. But I digress.

Every vote counts. The tighter the margins the better. We need the Democrats to do better, as in run better candidates, in order to win, but if they ever do that, there better be a leftist voting block who helped them get into office. Otherwise the Democrats will not feel safe enough to shift left.

Leftists need to be voting in record numbers to shift the Democratic Party to the left. Part of the way we do that is to vote for Democrats consistently. This should be a mechanical choice of who to vote for in the general. It’s hard to do that when posts disparaging fixing the Democratic Party as impossible or so hard it’s not worth trying are going unchallenged on the internet, including Lemmy.

Fixing the Democratic Party and this country will take time and a lot of work. Part of that work involves voting for Democrats.

The user who made this post made a point of proudly declaring they did not vote for president when the election rolled around last year. Because ‘voters in California don’t matter’. Except we do, because we contribute to the popular vote which Republicans love to use rhetorically to claim everyone else needs to shut up because they have the mandate.

Which they don’t have because Trump didn’t even get a majority of the voters, just the most out of any candidate. But it’s still a free win to them anyway.

Democrats lost elections and leftists weren’t the base consistently voting. Neoliberals and neocons and now fascists are the groups that vote regularly. Accelerationism is self-evidently getting us to fascism faster.

With all due respect, that strategy got us fascism.

That argument is obviously false. We, people to the left of Republican voters, have been losing elections and Democrats since Clinton have been moving right as a result.

Apparently not, because socialsts/progressives/leftists are lazy, good-for-nothings who are simultaneously powerful enough to swing elections, but too inconsequential to talk about their issues or court their votes.

Of course we need more than just leftists to vote. We need to demonstrate a leftist voter block was part of what got Democratic candidates into office. So the Democrats feel they have voters to cover the ones on the right they think they could lose by shifting left.

In other words, maybe these vaunted “centrists”/liberals should’ve stepped up to stop fascism.

Yes. There can be more than one lesson to learn from an election. Democrats fucking up more than us doesn’t mean we don’t have a lesson to learn too. Obviously Democrats have to do better. But if they win without leftists when they do run a better candidate, they aren’t going to shift left. They’ll think they’ve hit the sweet spot and stay put on the political spectrum.

With Gavin Newsom, a Charlie Kirk podcast guest, the choice in 2028 might be two fascists.

We lost to Nixon and it got worse. We lost to Regan and it got worse. We lost to two different Bushes and it got worse. Now we’ve lost to Trump twice and it got worse.

The throughline is that we keep losing to the greater evil and suffering the consequences of things getting worse as a result. That includes worse choices next time as the Democrats move to the right to chase the people who vote for the greater evil. As opposed to going for people who don’t vote or throw away their vote to a third party.

The Democratic Party is going to be rightwing until people learn we have to vote in addition to everything else to get Democrats to move to the left. They will only think about moving left if they win elections. And they only move left when they think they have enough voters to win when they do move.

If we, leftists, want better choices in 50 years we have got to vote in records numbers, so if Democrats get their act together and get someone half-way decent they win. And when they do, they see a leftist voter block got them there.