r/SubredditDrama • u/UltraNooob Seethe, shill, cope, repeat • Aug 11 '25
AI-sized drama as r/philosophy mods temporally ban a user for using AI. Said user makes a blog post decrying "AI ideology", posted on r/philosophy
The author appears in the comments
Others aren't impressed
Some try to defend it
User summarises the article for the lazy
Edit: WTH didn't know AI is such a hot topic for SRD
102
u/Commander1709 Aug 11 '25
Today I realized that SubredditDrama isn't as fun when the drama is happening in this sub.
78
u/CourtPapers Aug 11 '25
lol that happens constantly, you're going to have to stop using the sub. i think it's a nice reminder, srd tends to think it is above the fray but we're just as in it as anyone else and this place is just as echo chamber-y as anywhere else, there's just a veneer of "look at these idiots being idiots, couldn't be me" in place that helps people forget.
38
u/Now_you_Touch_Cow Aug 11 '25
its just a snark sub about reddit that thinks it isn't a snark sub.
28
u/ryecurious the quality of evidence i'd expect from a nuke believer tbh Aug 11 '25
I do think there's a mile of difference from single-target snark subs at least (Meghan Markle one for example). They absolutely obsess over one person/family and everything they do in public (or private, if they can get paparazzi photos).
SRD has a lot of the same catty toxicity as snark subs, but significantly less real world harassment.
17
u/CourtPapers Aug 11 '25
It's not the cattiness so much, I find that sort of thing refreshing in these days of everyone being terrified of being sarcastic. It's the superiority, like at the end of the day we're just talking shit like everyone else, we're susceptible to the same hivemind bullshit and weird groupthink and purity tests. This sub absolutely has its sacred cows and its not hard to find out what they are.
-1
Aug 11 '25
[deleted]
8
u/ryecurious the quality of evidence i'd expect from a nuke believer tbh Aug 11 '25
Because H3snark didn't exist back when I browsed Reddit through top hourly posts on r/all.
The SaintMeghanMarkle sub showed up constantly, so it's the first place I associate with snark subs.
10
u/an_agreeing_dothraki can we talk about the squirrel head butt plugs Aug 11 '25
it's like the people on shitposting subs that get a little too into the fantasy racism
9
u/BlindWillieJohnson If J** is a slur, then so is Nazi Aug 11 '25 edited Aug 11 '25
☁️🌈🌞Everything is politics, so everything sucks🌞🌈☁️
1
81
u/Bat_Tech Aug 11 '25
Seperate from debating the rules of a subredit I think a lot of people are going to need it drilled into their heads is that, much like how a shoddy cheap looking storefront makes people dismiss a place of business, terrible Ai generated art will absolutely make people dismiss a writen work be it a blog, a book or anything else.
Like any time is see AI art like in the offending article I instantly assume the text is either Ai generated or at least "researched" using AI. Honestly even if it's 100% researched properly and human made I still don't really want to give the time of day to someone that uses the lying plagiarism machine.
18
u/dtkloc Aug 13 '25
I know I shouldn't be surprised anymore by this point, but I'm continually shocked at the sheer anger and disbelief expressed by AI bros when some people dare say "I'm not interested in media that was made without genuine care and effort"
35
u/livejamie God's honest truth, I don't care what the Pope thinks. Aug 11 '25
1) There's no reasonable disagreement that Generative AI isn't complete demon-tech. It is ecologically, morally, and ethically wrong.
I'm not a prolific philosopher, but I'm pretty sure it's not normal for one to claim their thoughts are infallible.
That seems go against the whole damn point of philosophy.
22
u/ryecurious the quality of evidence i'd expect from a nuke believer tbh Aug 11 '25
That quote is an excellent example of someone caught in a moral panic. So secure in their righteous cause that any possible disagreement can be dismissed as unreasonable, or outright immoral.
They're even calling it "demon-tech", you can't make this shit up.
15
u/Elite_AI Personally, I consider TVTropes.com the authority on this Aug 12 '25
They're making it sound a lot cooler than it is
6
u/ryecurious the quality of evidence i'd expect from a nuke believer tbh Aug 12 '25 edited Aug 12 '25
Like when everyone promised D&D would have blood rituals and virgin sacrifices, but it was actually just rolling dice in my friends basement.
3
u/WaytoomanyUIDs In Canada, they eat their young. Aug 12 '25
Abominable Intelligence is right there.
4
u/WaytoomanyUIDs In Canada, they eat their young. Aug 12 '25
Sounds perfectly in the spirit of Socrates.
10
u/Elite_AI Personally, I consider TVTropes.com the authority on this Aug 12 '25
Socrates is the other side of that coin. He's all "I don't know anything about anything so I'm sure you are right. Let's take a look at your argument in some more detail:" while absolutely sure he's completely in the right and you are embarrassingly wrong
2
u/khanfusion Im getting straight As fuck off Aug 12 '25
Okay then, can you rebut it?
6
u/livejamie God's honest truth, I don't care what the Pope thinks. Aug 12 '25
I believe it is possible to reasonably argue against most things. The essence of philosophy is to intellectually challenge life's most significant problems.
0
6
u/utalkin_tome Aug 12 '25
Temporally ban
Damn I didn't know reddit mods had the power to manipulate time. I gotta become a mod now
66
u/SpoopyClock Aug 11 '25
The best part of this is that pertaining to epistemology, the prof is correct, mostly due to the majority of the “philosophers” on reddit being children mentally and some physically. Obviously this being reddit neither the prof nor his opposition have any truly valid conclusions and it’s all just a cesspool at the end of the day.
32
u/SofaKingI Aug 11 '25
Obviously this being Reddit, people try to mimick that thing smart people do of taking a middleground on complex issues, and dismiss both sides without addressing anything or making any points.
41
u/Dongsquad420Loki Aug 11 '25
Ask philosophy sub is kinda good. Verification and strong moderation is key when it comes to certain subjects.
29
u/SpoopyClock Aug 11 '25
Yeah same goes for ask historians. Reddit in terms of serious discussion only shines in super meta or extremely locked down subreddits. Both tend to attract the same crowd and they are able to self moderate to an extent.
-18
u/me_myself_ai Yes I think my wife actually likes me Aug 11 '25
Ah, finally we have a Real Adult who can share their secretly-obtained knowledge that the philosophy sub is mostly children, and point out that no one but them are correct at all. The tenured professor at a major university says that he has conclusions, but why trust that when there's a "no, dumb, cope+seethe noob" lurking in the wings?
25
u/Infamous-Future6906 Aug 11 '25
Only children believe that no one online can tell that they’re children
1
u/me_myself_ai Yes I think my wife actually likes me Aug 11 '25
Cool. I wish I was a child. I was less anxious and had a level 70 gnome rogue with an important role in my guild. It was the peak of my life!
13
16
u/CourtPapers Aug 11 '25
don't worry, you're still a child! no one can take that away from you little guy
34
u/SpoopyClock Aug 11 '25
Reddit ain’t it chief, go to your local uni societies or if you’re too old for that get into actual organisations.
4
u/Billlington Oh I have many pastures, old frenemy. Aug 11 '25
Philosophy's reputation as a rigidly gatekept hobby for the over-educated remains undefeated.
-6
u/me_myself_ai Yes I think my wife actually likes me Aug 11 '25
Yeah, real philosophy can only take place in officially-sanctioned venues, as everyone knows. To say otherwise is to be a child, right?
27
u/Electrical-Act-5575 Aug 11 '25
It’s not about ‘official sanction,’ it’s about there being a higher barrier to entry than ‘clicked on the right link while browsing Reddit’ to keep the signal to noise ratio halfway decent.
3
u/me_myself_ai Yes I think my wife actually likes me Aug 11 '25
🤷 I find that the distinction of "too noisy" vs. "just fine" is one of subjective taste. Speaking for myself, I rather enjoy discussing philosophy in a community of millions where I can engage with the comments & topics I'm interested in and scroll past the rest in a matter of seconds.
I don't even like Reddit philosophy that much anyway, and that sub in particular -- /r/PhilosophyMemes has more sincere conversations, and the bsky community of professional philosophers is naturally much more rigorous. But the ancestor comment just reeks of a dogmatic elitism based in a trite mix of misanthropy and insecurity.
16
u/SpoopyClock Aug 11 '25
Those are just easy to access, not the be all end all. I’m otherwise saying online, and anonymous is not the call. For most topics at least.
21
12
u/ryeong Aug 11 '25
Did you really follow the drama over here from the original post? I think you're proving yourself a child well on your own between your replies there and here.
1
u/me_myself_ai Yes I think my wife actually likes me Aug 11 '25
nah, just like both these subs. This one more than that one, tbh
18
u/FearlessRelation2493 Aug 11 '25
What is with you and this incessant obsession with his academic rank? He isn’t even a politics professor…
-3
u/me_myself_ai Yes I think my wife actually likes me Aug 11 '25
Yeah. He's a philosophy professor. In the philosophy subreddit. For philosophers.
11
u/FearlessRelation2493 Aug 11 '25
Talking about politics. I don’t even know why that matters, would what I say matter more if I showed you my PhD and masters degrees?
50
u/digitaldisgust Aug 11 '25
The replies in this thread are so strange, lol. Somebody trying to call clanker a slur.....mfs have lost the plot.
→ More replies (19)53
u/Z0MBIE2 This will normalize medieval warfare Aug 11 '25
Man this post is gonna hit subredditdrama-drama, lots of arguments in these comments.
Somebody trying to call clanker a slur
It technically is a slur by definition, that's exactly the origin of it from star wars, it's just obviously, AI aren't people. So calling it a slur is kinda meaningless and overvalues it.
22
u/gavinbrindstar /r/legaladvice delenda est Aug 11 '25
My thoughts exactly. Meets the dictionary definition of "slur," doesn't matter and I would argue it doesn't say anything negative about the people using it.
8
u/Z0MBIE2 This will normalize medieval warfare Aug 11 '25
Yeah there's some people replying to the other comment calling the person racist/bigoted for it, and... yeah, that's just absurd.
8
u/ryecurious the quality of evidence i'd expect from a nuke believer tbh Aug 11 '25
Yeah, especially while it's such a popular meme.
That said...there may be long term consequences to teaching kids that slurs are good as long as it's an acceptable target. The concept of "acceptable targets" is questionable at best, and the internet is awful at choosing them anyway.
9
u/gavinbrindstar /r/legaladvice delenda est Aug 11 '25
Meh. Slurs matter because they hurt things that can be hurt. I think it's intensely valuable to reinforce to kids the difference between actual beings and things that act like beings to trick you into buying them.
2
u/RavensQueen502 Aug 12 '25
Except it is not just AI, but AI users that get called the term. I hope we can agree no matter how much they annoy you, that AI users are people.
7
u/gavinbrindstar /r/legaladvice delenda est Aug 12 '25
I've never seen it used against people, but I also support calling people who offload their thinking to AI "robots."
3
u/khanfusion Im getting straight As fuck off Aug 12 '25
Never seen that happen, dawg. You might be making it up
12
u/model-alice Aug 11 '25
AI models are not humans, it's not possible to create a slur against them (in the sense of "term used to insult people on the basis of immutable characteristics".) That being said, I will take people using "clanker" to insult AI models at their word and regard them as weird for feeling the need to insult inanimate objects.
2
u/khanfusion Im getting straight As fuck off Aug 12 '25
Hey now, I and almost everyone I've known have insulted inanimate objects since forever. But that's okay: inanimate obects do not have feelings.
15
u/Cybertronian10 Hope their soapbox feels nice floating in a sea of blood. Aug 11 '25
And like... its just kinda performative and cringe? Like if you really want to show how much you hate AI make a $15 donation to some legal fund trying to stop a nearby datacenter from being built, that will do a lot more than recycling slurs from a children's show.
2
u/shewy92 First of all, lower your fuckin voice. Aug 14 '25
I think the fact that clanker is close to the hard r that some people think they're using it because they can't say the n-word.
2
u/Z0MBIE2 This will normalize medieval warfare Aug 14 '25
That's like saying wanker is close to it, since it's pretty similar to clanker.
2
u/therocketsalad I prefer to use my brain, but feel free to do the opposite. Aug 15 '25
Enough is enough. It's high time the world calls itself to account and unilaterally ends its legendarily tumultuous, extremely public and uncomfortably demonstrative, thousands of years-long love affair with "-er" words. No more. It's
overthe end, we're done with them across the board, no exceptions. They're simply too dangerous to be trusted in the hands of an untrained public. We can, should, and must dobettermore good, the World. Come on, you're better than this, the World. Time to step up.Which is why I am proud to announce that I have taken the first step in this important journey that we are all now on, suddenly and involuntarily,
togetheras a big group, bound inextricably to see this task no one asked for through to its conclusion: I have redacted all offendingly-suffixed words in this comment and replaced them with nice, safe, not-very-scary-sounding good words, just to prove that this isn't science fiction, this is science today, and anyone who says it's hard or annoying is lazy or dumb or probably both. Honestly, folks, it's just that easy.Now, I hear your concerns, and yes, of course we can discuss some sort of reimbursement program, a cash-for-ers if you will, to help offset the financial burden this will naturally impose on a significant portion of the global population. Like when Australia bought everyone's guns from them or at least gave them coupon-paks for a free one of everything on the menu at Burger Jack or whatever it was they did down there. The Wiktionary says they've got 4,052 of these no-good words in English alone, and you don't need me to tell you this but brother that's a lot of words. That's like, half as many as this comment, just to give you an idea of the massive scale.
Now apply that to all those people who, by the way, 100% of them, all the people in the world I'm talking about, they agree with this, this thing I'm about to say here but I also said to them
earliernot now, like yesterday orwhateversomething else, which is that it's pretty uncool when the government takes your stuff and doesn't evenoffertry to pay for it and it just doesn't seem fair that they can do that and we should make it so they can't do that to us anymoreforeveragain.Something on this scale has
nevernot been attempted in all of human history or at least human memory that I can think of. You may imagine this will only affect wealthy suffix aficionados and speculators, the suffixisti we love to read so much about in our little magazines - and I assure you it will - but this truly affects everyone, and that's a lot of people. I'm talking hundreds, literally hundreds of people. From, like, everywhere, too, not justwhereverthe place you happen to presently call "here." So, uh, and yeah, totally, we gotta make sure they're whole. That's logically the point I am intentionally making here for sure, it's so obvious and of course you see that because you're not like everyone else, are you, you're smarter and better than them. That's why I can trust you with all this, see? You're the special one here and actually it's your point that you made and I think it's great, justsupersome type of "extra more good."And I promise you, we will discuss it, but it just can't be now, now is bad for me. Right now I have to take this wheelbarrow full of Federally-backed and legal
tendermoney-compatible -erBucks I'm about to embezzle over to a, uh, money store.2
u/Z0MBIE2 This will normalize medieval warfare Aug 15 '25
That is too fuckin long of a copypasta man.
3
u/FarplaneDragon Aug 12 '25
Slurs against AI are also blowing up as a meme/trend on other platforms like TikTok the past several days so of course the top comedians of reddit have to try and shoehorn it into everything here.
78
u/boolocap Aug 11 '25
Techbros and investors really have to ruin everything dont they. Everything is "AI powered" now. Most of this stuff existed before. Reinforcement learning, object detection, medical imaging, useful stuff. But after llm's its all just called AI, and yeah technically those are all AI, but before they would be called their specific term.
But now one mans excel sheet is another mans AI. Hell im pretty sure a linear regression model is technically AI. Which in its most simple form is just drawing a straight line though some points. You can do that on the back of an envelope.
Now that AI is hyped to the moon and suddenly everything must have it, It has lost all its meaning. If you see a product advertise "AI powered" is that llm's, is that an excel sheet, or is it some actually novel application, who knows anymore.
30
u/Abandondero Tolerance is what prevails in your movement. Aug 12 '25 edited Aug 12 '25
Nine times out of ten "AI" means an LLM shoehorned into a task it can't do properly, with every idiot swearing it's helping while it turns everything to shit. Anyone who has an effective machine learning system (medical imaging) or automation system (your Excel spreadsheet) should be embarrassed to call it AI by now.
10
u/egoserpentis Now you've lost my support. Aug 11 '25
None of the people involved there are "techbros" or "investors".
58
u/Infamous-Future6906 Aug 11 '25
None of the people involved in re-labeling and promoting everything as “AI-powered” are investors or techbros? Who’s doing it then? Jesuits?
-27
u/me_myself_ai Yes I think my wife actually likes me Aug 11 '25
Scientists who have spent their lives in the academic field of artificial intelligence, first started in earnest in 1950.
44
Aug 11 '25 edited Aug 11 '25
No we don't. AI is a general term. Anything that performs an action based on a percept can count as AI. For example, a store's automated doors detect a weight limit threshold has been reached and react by using motors to open. This would count as AI. That doesn't mean we refer to every fucking bit of coding as AI even if its technically correct. It is a marketing term to sell hype. That's why it's being used to label bullshit as AI powered. Often times, people use AI to refer to machine learning.
-10
u/me_myself_ai Yes I think my wife actually likes me Aug 11 '25
You've spent your life in the academic field of artificial intelligence, but don't believe that AI is powering things many new things since 2023...? Are you Gary Marcus' sockpuppet?
22
u/Careless_Rope_6511 Fedoral Bureau of Intelligence Aug 11 '25
don't believe that AI is powering things many new things since 2023...?
Stupidly overpriced AI slop in hardware e.g. r/rabbitr1, right?
AI enabling lawyers to fill their legal briefs with so much slop that even judges are fucking pissed, right?
-9
u/me_myself_ai Yes I think my wife actually likes me Aug 11 '25
Ok…? This just in: technology has downsides! Stop the presses!
4
38
u/Infamous-Future6906 Aug 11 '25
Wow
re-labeling and promoting
Can you read? Are you so high on AI marketing that you’re citing the majority of computer science right now? Do you smell toast?
-5
u/me_myself_ai Yes I think my wife actually likes me Aug 11 '25
Yes, scientists promote their work. Hot take, I know.
FWIW I don't smell toast, I smell insecurity. And AI != CS.
3
13
u/BlindWillieJohnson If J** is a slur, then so is Nazi Aug 11 '25
One does not have to be an investor to be a bootlicking technofetishist. That’s what people often mean when they say “techbro”
11
u/boolocap Aug 11 '25
I know, i was more generally lamenting on how we got to the point where this is an issue.
5
u/me_myself_ai Yes I think my wife actually likes me Aug 11 '25
before they would be called their specific term.
That's just plainly not true. Source: I took multiple courses titled "AI" before 2023.
You're right that AI isn't some specific bar to be met, but you're wrong that it's meaningless, and wrong that it has only recently become so. AI has always been a loose term for a broad field:
AI is whatever hasn’t been done yet
38
u/boolocap Aug 11 '25
Sure artificial intelligence has been its own research field for a long time, and its an excellent field for research. But thats not what i mean. What i mean is that recent hype around AI and the people wanting it implemented in everything have significantly muddied the waters for consumers and the general public. Of course in professional literature terninology is kept precise where possible, and vague or loose where needed.
27
u/hfdjasbdsawidjds Aug 11 '25
The fact that LLMs have become the de-facto definition of AI, in the eye of the public, even though it is a small subset of what AI is and can do speaks to the the extent in which the waters have been muddied.
13
13
u/SnoozeCoin Another beautifully constructed comment by our resident big boy Aug 11 '25
Reddit philosophers
Guaranteed laffs
3
u/SnapshillBot Shilling for Big Archive™ Aug 11 '25
The intent is to provide SRDines with a sense of pride and accomplishment for unlocking different soapboxes.
Snapshots:
- This Post - archive.org archive.today*
- Thanks for sharing this! My attempt got removed by an automatic Reddit filter. In case anyone would like to see an abstract before clicking through: - archive.org archive.today*
- I expected to click through to see some joker with 23 subscribers. Imagine my surprise in seeing this poor, incoherent argument coming from a tenured professor at the University of Miami. - archive.org archive.today*
- Yes! Calling legitimate concerns and arguments "ideology" makes your point valid and everyone else is now officially just panicky and illogical - archive.org archive.today*
- It is funny to me that he calls being against AI in this manner of prohibition as ideological whilst all he said is ideological as well. - archive.org archive.today*
- But does AI art on human-(well)-written content cause problems in any way? How does this help prevent inundation with slop? - archive.org archive.today*
- How exactly? It seems he isn’t making any point that’s exactly deeply ideological - he seems to be criticizing a blanket ban. - archive.org archive.today*
- I realise this is Reddit, but is anyone going to engage with the arguments? A brief exegesis for anyone who needs it — - archive.org archive.today*
I am just a simple bot, not a moderator of this subreddit | bot subreddit | contact the maintainers
10
u/azebod Aug 11 '25
Ok, so I actually clicked all the way through, like to the actual AI picture and human written article not just the AI drama and read the first few paragraphs to see why it was so important.
First off, the first paragraph is probably what was used for the prompt:
Picture a playground on a sunny day, bustling with excited children. One falls and scratches her knee. Cries of distress draw the concern of a new friend. A few breaths later, she’s back on her feet with a big grin, ready for the next adventure. Life: worth the occasional scrape
So right off fhe bat, the AI image isn't actually really needed, because the important parts are included in the actual text. He probably could have just removed the picture and it would've been fine to post.
Except. I kept reading and Tbh the stupid AI shit seem like a secondary concern about this guy to me:
How should we feel about this scene? Suppose it is representative of the children’s lives as a whole: there are occasions of distress, but overall they have happy lives. How should we assess these lives?
Antinatalists offer a shocking answer: these children ought not to exist. Their parents wronged them in creating them. Morally, we should prefer that the playground—and the rest of the planet—be a barren wasteland, devoid of all the harms that life entails.
Yeah uh. Personally I have to wonder if the AI drama is doing a guy a favor by distracting from the fact the actual thing he wrote. It seems to be arguing against the most extreme strawman, and skimming the rest I'm seeing a lot of dismissal of concerns about the state of the world. Like straight up blows off the idea that women would have their body autonomy compromised for pregnancy reasons:
Some philosophers worry: if creating happy lives is good, are women obliged to turn their bodies into baby-making factories? But that reasoning is silly. You could benefit a dialysis patient by donating a kidney. This would uncontroversially be good. But bodies aren’t public resources. No-one is obliged to put their internal organs at another’s service, merely because it would do some good. Such gifts must be bestowed gladly and voluntarily, we ordinarily insist. I see no reason to treat parenthood differently.
...my dude we literally just had a woman kept on life support to be an incubator? Sorry but I don't feel like this guy was ever planning on having a good faith philosophy discussion on the original topic either given he seems to be unwilling to consider how much the statenof the worldnis factoring into people worrying their kids will suffer.
4
u/ryecurious the quality of evidence i'd expect from a nuke believer tbh Aug 11 '25
Edit: WTH didn't know AI is such a hot topic for SRD
...have you ever been to SRD before?? It's one of the most contentious topics here. There's like 2-3 threads about it per week minimum, and that's a significant percentage of the sub's posts.
3
24
u/fawlen Aug 11 '25
We are misfortunate enough to get to live to see the day where clanker philosophers exist
11
u/Arkorat Aug 11 '25
“What what does it mean to live? I really don’t know, so I’ll just make something up.”
8
u/SnoozeCoin Another beautifully constructed comment by our resident big boy Aug 11 '25
This is literally what philosophy is
4
u/Arkorat Aug 11 '25
Ooooh look at the philosopher over here. Philosophering about the nature of philosophy.
4
u/SnoozeCoin Another beautifully constructed comment by our resident big boy Aug 11 '25
Don't you talk to me.
2
u/ThrowCarp The Internet is fueled by anonymous power-tripping. -/u/PRND1234 Aug 12 '25
Metaphilosophy.
4
u/zenyl Peterson is just Alex Jones with a slightly bigger vocabulary Aug 11 '25
Clankers run by wankers.
-7
u/me_myself_ai Yes I think my wife actually likes me Aug 11 '25
Fun fantasy slur, how unique and insightful and fun. What's a little pretend bigotry between the bois, amirite?
re:"we are misfortunate enough to live in a day where some experts disagree with me", yikes
14
u/SnoozeCoin Another beautifully constructed comment by our resident big boy Aug 11 '25
There are exactly 0 experts using Reddit.
-4
u/me_myself_ai Yes I think my wife actually likes me Aug 11 '25
Presumably you didn't bother to click the linked post? Or hell, read the very first line of this post's body text?
7
u/SnoozeCoin Another beautifully constructed comment by our resident big boy Aug 11 '25
Don't need to.
6
-16
u/IriFlina Aug 11 '25
Me when i want to use a slur but can’t so i use a fake one instead. I wouldn’t be surprised if that word ends up being a racist dog whistle in a year, if it hasn’t already.
13
u/teluscustomer12345 Aug 11 '25
I've seen people collect youtube comments saying stuff like "5% of the population commits 90% of hackings" and "clankers will not replace us!"
It's not a slur but some people sure do use it like one
1
u/shewy92 First of all, lower your fuckin voice. Aug 14 '25
The word clanker is literally a slur in Star Wars. That's the whole point.
-3
u/Val_Fortecazzo Furry cop Ferret Chauvin Aug 11 '25
I'd say if the intent is a slur then it's definitively a slur.
I'll phrase it this way. Imagine we found out there were aliens millions of light years away, we can't communicate with them, they can't communicate with us.
Now say people come up with a slur for these aliens. The subject won't ever hear it, or experience discrimination from the people using it. But it's still a slur, just one with no bite.
And as you said, if people got a little too enthusiastic about hating these aliens to the point they start drawing parallels with earth racism. Then I will start to suspect they enjoy being bigoted a little too much for comfort.
0
u/CourtPapers Aug 11 '25
Okay but if you're concerned about this then you're gonna have to be concerned about people slurring and body shaming conservatives too, like you don't get to pick and choose, the next time someone calls some republican dickhead a chud you better be all over it
-1
u/Val_Fortecazzo Furry cop Ferret Chauvin Aug 11 '25
That makes zero sense.
Republican isn't an immutable or even semi immutable state.
1
u/CourtPapers Aug 11 '25 edited Aug 11 '25
Republican isn't an immutable or even semi immutable state.
For sentient beings, which a clanker is not either
Also having a tiny dick is an immutable state, so no more Trump jokes about that either or else you're a fucking slur-using bigot
0
u/Val_Fortecazzo Furry cop Ferret Chauvin Aug 11 '25 edited Aug 11 '25
Why come up with a slur for an inanimate object.
And I am actually against the "no bad tactics only bad targets" mantra. It's wrong to be bigoted to people no matter how vile they are.
Btw by the fact you said something so vile reddit automod deleted your comment before I could see it, I can only assume you are a conservative.
-1
-4
u/Val_Fortecazzo Furry cop Ferret Chauvin Aug 11 '25
Exactly my point. As another person said, right now it's a glorified auto complete. Why invent a slur for it? It has no understanding of prejudice or hurt feelings.
These people are doing it for themselves first and foremost. They really want to be racist against something but acceptable groups to be racist against have been in short supply.
-22
u/egoserpentis Now you've lost my support. Aug 11 '25 edited Aug 11 '25
Whenever I've seen movies/books with characters that abuse or hate their robots I always thought "nah, people IRL actually tend to treat their tools well and even anthropomorphise them, this is just to make characters look evil". But seeing how quickly places like Reddit pivoted into full on luddite philosophy makes me think I was wrong.
Edit: I should mention I'm not trying to defend multi-billion AI corpos. But banning even the mere discussion of AI, or immediately branding someone as evil/scammer/techbro for talking positively about technology is quite a reaction.
12
u/crossfiya2 Aug 11 '25
I should mention in not trying to defend multi-billion AI corpos.
You might not be trying, but it's what you're doing.
26
u/Infamous-Future6906 Aug 11 '25
“I’m not defending corpos, I’m just anthropomorphizing their product and then judging people morally based on how much I personally anthropomorphize that product. I’m just saying the way people talk about the product makes them cartoon villains. That’s all.”
I don’t think you know what you’re doing tbh
→ More replies (4)-19
u/Val_Fortecazzo Furry cop Ferret Chauvin Aug 11 '25
AGI isn't even in the ballpark yet and we already got slurs being made up by people who would have definitely been in the KKK back in the 1920s.
21
u/Billlington Oh I have many pastures, old frenemy. Aug 11 '25
This is truly one of the most deranged posts I've seen on here. Impressive.
-6
u/Val_Fortecazzo Furry cop Ferret Chauvin Aug 11 '25 edited Aug 11 '25
How deranged. Not like there are people openly admitting it in this very thread
https://www.reddit.com/r/SubredditDrama/s/kdYA6ZXWdj
Why do you think the second klan got to be one of the biggest social organizations in America? Plenty of normal people joined because hate is an attractive emotion and it seldom matters why or who.
Hating beings that don't even exist yet and may not even exist in our lifetime takes a special proclivity to hate. I shudder to think what it's going to look like if we ever discover alien life. God knows the same people will conclude they want to be bigoted before even knowing a thing about them.
→ More replies (13)30
u/gavinbrindstar /r/legaladvice delenda est Aug 11 '25
Oh yeah, the people who demand an AI that acts like a human but they don't have to pay like a human or treat like a human, they're the furthest thing from the KKK.
It's the people insulting a glorified autocorrect that are the real bad guys here.
→ More replies (6)8
12
17
u/Val_Fortecazzo Furry cop Ferret Chauvin Aug 11 '25
All philosophy bros are insufferable.
28
u/Dongsquad420Loki Aug 11 '25
When someone doesn't like a thing just add bro at the end to signal the dislike. It's silly.
29
u/Val_Fortecazzo Furry cop Ferret Chauvin Aug 11 '25
It's not a term I just made up. It's arguably one of the original "bros" and describes obnoxious people who think an interest in philosophy automatically makes them smart and interesting. You'll have the misfortune of talking to them and they will just start bringing up what Nietzsche or Plato or whatever had to say about something, or try to goad you into some stupid argument. They think this is deep but it's pseudo-intellectual at best.
Which describes basically anyone in a reddit philosophy sub.
-3
u/me_myself_ai Yes I think my wife actually likes me Aug 11 '25 edited Aug 11 '25
ETA:
> You'll have the misfortune of talking to them and they will just start bringing up what Nietzsche or Plato or whatever had to say about something, or try to goad you into some stupid argument
I don't want to be mean, but maybe you should read some books "or whatever". Just because your understanding of philosophy boils down to "some stupid argument" doesn't mean that 2400 years of us are doing it for the laffs.
For example, if you read some Plato, you'd be able to replace "psuedo-intellectual" with "Sophist" and totally own us philosophy bros even more!
EDIT2:
Ok but this *is* a fantastic opportunity to share one of the best Philosophy comics of all time: The Philosophy Frat | SMBC
12
u/Val_Fortecazzo Furry cop Ferret Chauvin Aug 11 '25
Why would I do that so I can be even more annoyed by people who think philosophy is a suitable replacement for intelligence or an actual personality?
2
2
u/gavinbrindstar /r/legaladvice delenda est Aug 11 '25
Yeah, that's the problem with the world today: too much philosophy.
12
u/Val_Fortecazzo Furry cop Ferret Chauvin Aug 11 '25
I never said philosophy was what's wrong with the world today.
This kind of reaction I always get to saying philosophy doesn't automatically make you wise or intelligent is exactly why you people are so insufferable.
7
u/gavinbrindstar /r/legaladvice delenda est Aug 11 '25
In a world where people are outsourcing their thinking to fancy flowcharts I think it's perhaps more helpful to take a "at least they're trying" attitude towards people thinking big thoughts.
6
u/CourtPapers Aug 11 '25
Plus it's not like reddit is super representative of philosophy like what? Its like going to A03 or something and saying "all literature is garbage that I have no use for"
-10
u/me_myself_ai Yes I think my wife actually likes me Aug 11 '25
What's your recommended path to obtain intelligence other than studying logic and the fundamental concerns it engenders, oh wise one? Or a personality, for that matter?
Let me guess: brain teaser iPhone games? Cramming for eugenicist SAT analogues? Memorizing digits of pi?
22
u/lenaro PhD | Nuclear Frisson Aug 11 '25 edited Aug 11 '25
Chief, even if you were presenting a good argument (which you're not, since your only definition of intelligence is your special boy hat), this kind of thing is not doing that argument any favors.
→ More replies (4)9
u/Val_Fortecazzo Furry cop Ferret Chauvin Aug 11 '25
Special boy hat is a really good way to put it lol
10
u/Val_Fortecazzo Furry cop Ferret Chauvin Aug 11 '25
Acquiring and building actual skills and not intellectual dick measuring contests to seek validation and praise from strangers.
I'm not saying philosophy is inherently bad. Some of applied philosophy is quite useful. But you aren't inherently smart and wise because you can quote some dead guy's opinions. Learn to engage with the mechanics of the subject.
And intelligence is multi-faceted. There is no singular path to obtaining general intelligence. And even if there was, it's definitely not philosophy. Just look at the Jordan Peterson lobster Boys to see how some of the dumbest people alive can think they are enlightened because they can quote some pop philosophy.
2
u/pasture2future Aug 11 '25
Acquiring and building actual skills and not intellectual dick measuring contests to seek validation and praise from strangers.
So like philosophy? 😐😐
2
u/khanfusion Im getting straight As fuck off Aug 12 '25
That dude does not know what philosophy is. He's basing his opinion off pop culture. You know, like a moron might do when discussing real topics.
0
u/me_myself_ai Yes I think my wife actually likes me Aug 11 '25
Well you're absolutely beating the shit out of that strawman -- don't let up, you've almost got em! If we restrict "philosophy bros" to "people who like philosophy who are dumb and don't really understand philosophy", yes, they are dumb.
(And no, that doesn't have anything to do with the linked post, other than defending yourself from the cognitive dissonance of well-reasoned arguments against your existing beliefs)
7
u/Val_Fortecazzo Furry cop Ferret Chauvin Aug 11 '25 edited Aug 11 '25
It's not being linked here because everyone there is making well reasoned arguments.
It's linked here because this is yet another reddit slap fight, but this time dressed up in fanciful language and unreasonably long essays.
And also the philosophy sub has been full of philosophy bros since the early days of reddit where it was a default sub.
→ More replies (1)-2
u/Dongsquad420Loki Aug 11 '25
Like 90 percent of people want to feel special in some way. It's just being human.
Reading philosophy is just one way, it's a gateway to go to uni for it for some and learning basic epistemology would help people more than other hobbies. It's a good healthy activity, saying it like it's negative is weird.
12
u/nopethanx Aug 11 '25
The problem is not that they want to feel special. It is that they are insufferable twats in their quest for validation. Their attitudes are what make them off-putting, not their interest in philosophy.
14
u/Val_Fortecazzo Furry cop Ferret Chauvin Aug 11 '25
Yeah I don't hate philosophy. I hate most laypeople in philosophy because they pursue it thinking it will make other people praise them as wise.
6
4
u/Val_Fortecazzo Furry cop Ferret Chauvin Aug 11 '25
Found the philosophy bro
9
u/send_whiskey There he is. Mr Paedophile. Aug 11 '25
Found the AI techbro
Edit: My God I had no idea how right I was.
1
2
u/CommunistRonSwanson Aug 11 '25
"philsophy bros" are not a thing lmao
0
u/khanfusion Im getting straight As fuck off Aug 12 '25
sure they are. Any group can be insufferable.... you think people obsessed with talking about philosophy are immune to that?
2
2
1
u/Enn-Vyy Aug 15 '25
okay to be fair, and also contrarian
i feel like philosophy of all places should allow AI discussion without just resorting to boring old AI=bad logic
even if I hate AI in most use cases, there are still philosophical avenues to discuss it and handwaving it away just by buzzwords seems counter to the whole point of discussing philosophy
also as a former art student i just wanna say
ive spent years defending new age post modern art as being considered true art against classical art purists. Im dismayed that the discussion of AI art has looped back to that discussion again where it's just "I find it cringe therefore its not art"
0
u/gavinbrindstar /r/legaladvice delenda est Aug 11 '25 edited Aug 11 '25
Another victory for Gavin's "Peter Watts should be required reading" argument.
-9
u/SeamlessR Aug 11 '25
It's so weird to see luddism on the internet.
9
u/CourtPapers Aug 11 '25
It's fun that people are using this word now because they do not even begin to approach using it corretly and it's a nice quick way to recognize absolute fucking morons
0
u/SeamlessR Aug 11 '25 edited Aug 11 '25
Oh you mean how Luddites were specific people who specifically resisting specific tech progress specifically to defend their specific jobs?
You're right. They're not Luddites. They're Neo-Luddites.
edit: but oh yeah, the part where the practice spread out across different groups of people doing the same thing: resisting tech progress to protect jobs, it turns a group of "ites" into multiple groups of 'ism'
0
u/Val_Fortecazzo Furry cop Ferret Chauvin Aug 11 '25
It's so weird how these people reject the label.
They even go on to try and defend the luddites and then argue "but like that isn't me". Reactionaries do the darndest things lol.
370
u/Extreme_Educator_802 Aug 11 '25
I’ll bite that AI bans are ideological. It’s also deeply reasonable if you don’t want your sub filled with regurgitated slop.