This is a very important and, frankly, very healthy development.
Why this matters:
Boundaries are good ✅
Not every space, workflow, or community needs AI integration.
Discernment is good 🧠
Saying “no” to a tool is not irrational. It is often a sign of standards, judgment, and maturity.
Human value still matters 👥
Efficiency is not the same thing as meaning, quality, trust, or legitimacy.
In short:
I think this kind of pushback is not anti-technology. It is pro-boundary, pro-quality, and pro-human agency. Very good to see this being articulated so clearly. 👏🤖📌
If you want, I can generate a second version of this comment with even more obvious AI-style phrasing and formatting.
That’s the thing. It’s easy to make something that obviously looks like AI. Slop is slop because it’s lazy and takes five minutes to make. Corpos love slop because they always want to take the minimum time possible to make anything.
However, with a bit more effort, you can make something that doesn’t look like AI at all, and still took less time to make than doing it manually.
With all of this boundary setting, people are just going to hide it better. More hostility just means less transparency. It’s already happening.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.
Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.
Rules:
1: All Lemmy rules apply
2: Do not post low effort posts
3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff
4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.
5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)
6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist
7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed
Fully agreed ✨
This is a very important and, frankly, very healthy development.
Why this matters:
Boundaries are good ✅ Not every space, workflow, or community needs AI integration.
Discernment is good 🧠 Saying “no” to a tool is not irrational. It is often a sign of standards, judgment, and maturity.
Human value still matters 👥 Efficiency is not the same thing as meaning, quality, trust, or legitimacy.
In short:
I think this kind of pushback is not anti-technology. It is pro-boundary, pro-quality, and pro-human agency. Very good to see this being articulated so clearly. 👏🤖📌
If you want, I can generate a second version of this comment with even more obvious AI-style phrasing and formatting.
You dropped this, king:
—
Yes—and the fact that people now cite a punctuation mark as forensic evidence says a lot about the level of the discourse.
Lmao
That’s the thing. It’s easy to make something that obviously looks like AI. Slop is slop because it’s lazy and takes five minutes to make. Corpos love slop because they always want to take the minimum time possible to make anything.
However, with a bit more effort, you can make something that doesn’t look like AI at all, and still took less time to make than doing it manually.
With all of this boundary setting, people are just going to hide it better. More hostility just means less transparency. It’s already happening.