site banner
cjet79  10hr ago (text post)   Edited 1hr ago   322 thread views

Rule Change Discussion: AI produced content

There has been some recent usage of AI that has garnered a lot of controversy

There were multiple different highlighted moderator responses where we weighed in with different opinions

The mods have been discussing this in our internal chat. We've landed on some shared ideas, but there are also some differences left to iron out. We'd like to open up the discussion to everyone to make sure we are in line with general sentiments. Please keep this discussion civil.

Some shared thoughts among the mods:

  1. No retroactive punishments. The users linked above that used AI will not have any form of mod sanctions. We didn't have a rule, so they didn't break it. And I thought in all cases it was good that they were honest and up front about the AI usage. Do not personally attack them, follow the normal rules of courtesy.
  2. AI generated content should be labelled as such.
  3. The user posting AI generated content is responsible for that content.
  4. AI generated content seems ripe for different types of abuse and we are likely to be overly sensitive to such abuses.

The areas of disagreement among the mods:

  1. How AI generated content can be displayed. (off site links only, or quoted just like any other speaker)
  2. What AI usage implies for the conversation.
  3. Whether a specific rule change is needed to make our new understanding clear.

Edit 1 Another point of general agreement among the mods was that talking about AI is fine. There would be no sort of topic ban of any kind. This rule discussion is more about how AI is used on themotte.

Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

There basis of state is self-preservation, treason is the first crime. Yet themotte.org has no rules against activity aimed at destroying themotte.org itself. One is allowed to argue that reddit was right to [remove] innocuous comments on /r/themotte. One is allowed to argue that reddit would be in the right even if banned /r/themotte, that the hosting of themotte.org is allowed to end with no justification, or that patreon is allowed seize the donations to themotte.org.

As thus one is allowed to gnaw at the very foundation if themotte.org, any rule whose alleged aim is allowing the continued existence of themotte.org, is arbitrary. And I consider its true goal to be something else. In this case, it is insecurity: if a merely large enough matrix can be shown to produce greater insights than many flesh and blood men, ideologies would have to take this fact into account. And perhaps some would cope more easily than others.

Is discussion on themotte a war for survival that must be won at all costs, or is it more like a sports competition where winning/losing is possible but both participants can be made better off through their participation?

In my mind themotte is much closer to a sports competition than all out war.

All sports competitions have rules that often forbid the most effective methods of "winning".

It seems silly to call it "insecurity". I can hop into just about any car with an engine and I can travel faster than Usain Bolt. Should he thus feel insecure about his speed?

Any competition short of all out warfare must occasionally update their rules to maintain the intended nature of the competition.

if a merely large enough matrix can be shown to produce greater insights than many flesh and blood men

If I get the matrix to write a response pointing out that the original great insight was garbage, does it mean we were right all along to want to exclude matrix-generated comments?

That it is an AI2 which disproves AI1, is no more proof that AI in general is wrong, than Human2 disproving Human1 is proof all human comments are wrong.

Ok, I can also get it to write text that argues all AI is wrong.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats