You can be for or against anything. This is a lot like having an opinion about, say, Oxford commas in a style guide, or the format of a tax form. Which is to say: not likely to do anything in the short term, until the day that someone is designing a new language / set of forms, in which case promoting the stance ahead of time might affect their decision-making.

It's nice to see someone put this all into words. I've felt the same thing for years but never quite figured out how to articulate it.

of course they were

Hey, tone doesn't translate well over text, they did not use anu tone tags, and I'm already terrible at reading tone in the best of times. Lol, can you really blame me for at least asking? Haha.

I dunno, it is the most obvious nazi reference I've ever seen. Personally I feel like tone does translate well over text, although it's proportional to the speakers' familiarity in how to do it whereas for verbal communication it comes through without effort.

Nothing wrong with asking of course. But maybe it's useful data that it was, in fact, obvious.

at a practical level that word hasn't meant "one in ten" for like, decades. probably just need to get used to it.

not really "just as" at all if you think about it, though.

what a shame

It was pretty obvious to me, but the train of thought was something like this:

* this is a good attempt at a work of art, but written in a generic style that detracts from it * nobody making genuinely good attempts at art like this would also write so generically * and if they were making it generic on purpose, they wouldn't be able to do it so flawlessly * oh, it must be AI

I guess I can discern the presence of a human artist, but only in the idea, which just means it was a good prompt.

yeah i agree. the crux of it is no corporations / no ads / no astroturfing.

it's bad for the person, obviously. The point of society-wide policies is not to maximize economic efficiency; they're supposed to making society a good place to live. Of course if you only look at them under an economic lens they're going to seem bad. Economically the best policy would be to kill all the sick people.

strong agree, I feel like it poisons the fabric of society somehow when everything you interact with is fake or even just has a good chance of being fake, regardless of the also-shitty fact that it is also often trying to influence you.

Also how the being fake doesn't even have to be malicious. now every tom, dick, and harry wants to create content. All the world's a stage, follower count go up.

I held a hope that it would create an evolutionary pressure that would weed out people who fall for foolish arguments i.e. arguments without any sort of structure that should be capable of convincing anyone of anything. But that's just wishful thinking. People fall for anything as long as it's flattering and it allows them to do what they want to do when they want to do it.

Every propagandistic argument is going to be like that for 80% of people, and 40% of people are going to be within that 80% about 99% of the time. They think the biggest issue of our time is how much people complain.