[Opinion] Add an "🤖 AI Slop" reaction option to mark low-effort AI content

[StoatCatcher]

I think the title explains itself. There's already a Troll reaction in place so I think having one that signals that the post's contents are AI generated slop would fit in nicely. It should probably have a negative reaction score attached to it too.

 

[Durward]

I don't want to insult people or use this to just baselessly call out people. My intention with this suggestion is to just call out copy-pasted, sourceless and hallucinated information when it gets posted.

Threads being derailed is the minimum. And yes, your echo chamber sterilized environment would become yes people repeating the same thing. A crowd opinion like the days of colonizing where strict religious zealots decide what is copy-pasted, what is sourceless, and what is hallucinated, while those lemmings seeking attention would join in to fit in. You keep re-using those words, so they mean something to you.
You seriously can't believe these cult ideas are harmless, and that you wouldn't end up beating down and chasing off everything YOU and YOUR GROUPIES then think is hallucinated nonsense or otherwise trash to you and your own beliefs and practices.
What that group then is FOR or AGAINST would be the only thing left, which is the same thing that drove the Inquisition for 600 years.
That is the part that seriously bothers me, your intent is obvious. You seriously believe bashing others as a group, and controlling their content to make it something you want or like, is such a good thing. It smells like a reincarnation of someone who is trying to bring back some seriously bad history. Trying to defend it or soften it doesn't make it something positive. Eugenics was considered a great idea by the wealthy and the intelligent in my youth, it looked great to them, and was even protected with fake science, but you may not know any of the actual history behind how things like that start. They usually start with suggestions like yours... too late to take that back. You are now known for this...

that is how members in that community get to push out members and ideas they don't like out of their space over time, without having to involve moderators. This is a process that happens everywhere online and offline.

 

[SkullTraill]

Threads being derailed is the minimum. And yes, your echo chamber sterilized environment would become yes people repeating the same thing. A crowd opinion like the days of colonizing where strict religious zealots decide what is copy-pasted, what is sourceless, and what is hallucinated, while those lemmings seeking attention would join in to fit in. You keep re-using those words, so they mean something to you.
You seriously can't believe these cult ideas are harmless, and that you wouldn't end up beating down and chasing off everything YOU and YOUR GROUPIES then think is hallucinated nonsense or otherwise trash to you and your own beliefs and practices.
What that group then is FOR or AGAINST would be the only thing left, which is the same thing that drove the Inquisition for 600 years.
That is the part that seriously bothers me, your intent is obvious. You seriously believe bashing others as a group, and controlling their content to make it something you want or like, is such a good thing. It smells like a reincarnation of someone who is trying to bring back some seriously bad history. Trying to defend it or soften it doesn't make it something positive. Eugenics was considered a great idea by the wealthy and the intelligent in my youth, it looked great to them, and was even protected with fake science, but you may not know any of the actual history behind how things like that start. They usually start with suggestions like yours... too late to take that back. You are now known for this...

Man, SYBAU. Trying to equate an AI slop reaction with Eugenics… you are being unreasonably offended over all this. Try and find something more important to cry about.

 

[Durward]

Man, SYBAU. Trying to equate an AI slop reaction with Eugenics… you are being unreasonably offended over all this. Try and find something more important to cry about.

Pretty rude for a "staff member"... but as you already know, I could care less what you think or say. May your own SYBAU come back thrice to you. I'm certainly not here to engage with your axe wielding unfair practices, or your power trips. You already proved your true nature to me, and it interests me about as much as another ass pimple. I'm not afraid of you or what you think you have power over. It doesn't make what you say or your opinions somehow superior to anyone. It just is what it is, pampers in a wad about whatever.
Sure, there are more professional ways to say things, and why should mine be something yours is obviously not? I have little tolerance for BS and Neo BS like the above posts. We should never tolerate censorship or steering content by ugly mobs. MY OPINION is mine, and you can't take that from me, or censor me with whatever this attempt is.
Thanks for the evil Nun, I kind of like that award. If you find an angry badger, let me know, it fits me better. Now go play librarian and stop bothering me with insults.
I see the rat catcher thinks your response is great, which shows Kindergarten will be Kindergarten, again. Always the same nonsense with spoon fed children thinking they are playground bullies while fueling each other with reinforced support clicks. Get a real life.

 

[Kepler]

More reactions are good for creating community understanding without, as mentioned, derailing threads. So my support for this is favourable.

Regarding concerns of abuse, it doesn't appear that negative reactions are often misused with maliciousness.

However, members, myself included, may interpret use of a reaction differently than intent.
Maybe to signify slop of different types, Adderall Slop(loquacity) being a use that came to mind.

 

[Digiquo]

I think some good points were made in regards to either side, but I think the point about derailing threads is the most important to consider. I almost think a reaction solution is the wrong approach, because as was brought up it forces the OP to defend themselves in a reply to their own post instead of responding to an individual, but without a reaction people derail by asking if something is AI. The latter method isnt a big deal on platforms like Instagram or whatever in regards to art because it's just a comment, which on most platforms can be pinned to the top, or Youtube has the description feature that allows a user to add context.
Instead of an AI slop reaction, maybe create something like a note page, that allow users to post comments that are about the post that the OP can respond to, but which is not actually on the thread. Sort of how on wikis you have the main subject page, but then a tab that contains notes by community members about content that was changed or missing.
This way the thread subject isn't being derailed, users can voice their concerns to the OP about AI or other reasons, and a heretofore unspoken reason where the OP isn't having their actual profile or DM's bombarded with questions.

 

[beardedeldridge]

To paraphrase Dalton, “Well is it?”

Just be an adult about it and ignore the little robot face some internet rando may put on your post. Like the dude who put the laughing face on almost every post for months awhile back.

My vote is no more emojis, even a thread discussing it is becoming tedious roflmao. (Yes I’ve started in on the vodka for the evening) cheers.

-Eld

 

[StoatCatcher]

Some images for consideration.

 

[12RelayT10]

[place your icon here]


It's actually quite difficult, because I know how it feels when people judge your work as if it were made by AI. People say that you shouldn't care about what others think, but it's not that easy—especially when it comes to artwork, because I'm human, right?

So who came first? Was I here first, or was AI here first? I don't know. Everything feels quite complicated sometimes.



1.
It would be nice if people openly stated when AI helped them create something. At the same time, that's easier said than done. If AI improved a sentence, does that count? What if it translated a paragraph? Or suggested an outline for a text? The closer you look, the blurrier the distinction becomes.

History has seen these kinds of developments before. Once upon a time, everything was made by hand. Then machines arrived, and many feared that craftsmanship would disappear. Yet society adapted. The tools changed, and with them the skills that people valued.

AI will probably be no different. It is neither the end of creativity nor the solution to every problem. It is simply another tool—powerful enough to concern some people, and useful enough that it is not going away.

Perhaps the wisest approach is not to get too worked up about it. The technology is here, and it is here to stay. The real question is not whether people use AI, but how they use it.

Even a face-to-face conversation will be influenced by AI. Maybe a good idea would be to let authors add a small robot icon to show that AI was used. Although, at the rate things are going, we may eventually have to switch to a human icon to indicate that no AI was involved.



2.
Personally, I would prefer that posts made in the Music topic/category do not appear in the What's New feed. Since the Music section is more of a casual and entertainment-focused area, I don't think those posts should be mixed with the main content updates.

In addition, I believe users should neither gain nor lose karma/reputation points from activity in the Music section. This would help keep the karma system focused on contributions in the forum's core discussion areas rather than on music-related posts.

 

[Morell]

Some images for consideration.

We are talking AI slop, not decent robots.

 

[Rynnshng]

I think the title explains itself. There's already a Troll reaction in place so I think having one that signals that the post's contents are AI generated slop would fit in nicely. It should probably have a negative reaction score attached to it too.

That is not a good idea. AI (which is not even AI) has become a seamless means of rapid response that is used by politicians, youtubers, terrorists, university professors, and social media posters alike. I ran an AI philosophy group for four years which gave me acute awareness of the rise and tell-tale signs of ChatGPT and other AI generated commentary that few have noticed, and thus, not removed even four years on that indicate it was generated by AI. Many people are desperate to appear as though they have more oratory power than they do and shamelessly exploit the technology to further the prestige of their own social persona. As a case in point, one 'voice of reason', a colonel from the american military pretended to speak from the heart to the American populace about their rogue president. This is an extremely serious thing to do - yet he was clearly using ChatGPT, passing the words off as his own, and as if speaking with sincerity. We have turned a corner here, there is no going back, what is real has become far more difficult to determine and thus we enter an acceleration of the age of Deception by Perception.

I have noticed this forum has multiple posters using ChatGPT instead of a typed human-response, but it seems such posts are indistinguishable to a high percentage of people if not almost all of them. Since identification of AI generated content could be seen as subjective pending the moderator's specific ability to determine AI from natural response - your moderation efforts would risk seeming arbitrary and likely just damage the flow of conversation.

It is better to accept that AI is simply part of the social fabric now: its dangers, its wonders, its lacklustre tedium.

I wonder how Turing would feel about this?

 

[Rowena]

I'm not convinced by the need for a specific 'AI Slop' reaction, but given some of the 'as used by D&D' style AI cover art, and 'teenage incel wish-fulfillment fantasy' book content - perhaps a more generic facepalm reaction would be more useful, it would certainly then be more widely applicable.