So everyone who isn’t pro AI is just an astroturfer in a coordinated campaign?
I find that extremely unlikely.
I find that extremely unlikely.
I trust that wasn't what was intended but I'm not entirely sure what you did intend. So it's a little hard to engage with it.
And do you not see that it's a common form of intellectual dishonesty to pretend that a "there exists" statement is a "for all" statement, and now three people have tried to do this without adding anything at all to the discussion?
You seemed to imply there was a small amount of genuine anti-AI posting.
You then said the posts came in identifiable waves followed by explaining how people organize on discord to post such things.
All of that added up sounds to me like you are implying the vast majority of anti-AI sentiment is organized astroturfing. Yeah you never said every single one, I generalized on that front.
You say that’s not what you meant. Sorry, that was how I read your post. It sounded to me like a blatant dismissal of all critiques as fake or insincere.
That does not mean that all content is inorganic. In any culture war or wedge issue or agitprop campaign you seed with influencers and rely on amplification by ordinary people. But the influencers frame the debate, decide what the priorities are, etc.
It takes time and money to coordinate everyone's opinion on something. The natural tendency is toward entropy and fighting against that requires resources. So when large numbers of people believe the same thing and repeat the same lines that's a candidate for inorganic content. You can then investigate that further and decide whether it's a conlincidence or not.
Sometimes there's just a trend that catches on. But people also underestimate how much work and coordination goes into making something catch on.
This is a big part of why influencers and advertisers try to avoid the impression that they are paid to pretend to like something and why there are regulations requiring that you disclose paid content. People are easily fooled into thinking it's all just happening naturally and serendipitously.
I'll bite.
> You can track the small number of anti-AI sentiments that crop up here and elsewhere.
You say you can track. So, show me this "tracking".
There are fewer than 10 that come up repeatedly it's not hard to do.
Ones I see on HN frequently are the "slop" critique, the claim that AI produces inferior content, and the claim that customers hate it and it's being forced on them. These all go back at least to the luddite movement and have been used in every anti-tech movement I've looked into. I'm sure you're capable of tracking the other talking points.
There are other ones that don't go back to the luddites but which are nonsensical, like the critique that LLMs are statistical.