this post was submitted on 23 Jun 2026
358 points (95.4% liked)

Selfhosted

60177 readers
615 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

Detailed Rules Post

  1. Be civil.

  2. No spam.

  3. Posts are to be related to self-hosting.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or readme if you're providing a link.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title.

  6. No trolling.

  7. Promotion posts require active participation, with an account that is at least 30 days old. F/LOSS without a paywall has exceptions, with requirements. See the rules link for details.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Based on recent comments this feels like a discussion we should have. So..topic, basically.

I'm not looking to be chief noisemaker on this, but I stand by what I wrote in !privacy and what's in my post history.

https://lemmy.ml/post/48724623/26190950

Let's have at; do we want a [AI] and [NOT AI] tag. Why or why not?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Nominally, to avoid discrimination

What would you qualify as discrimination?

[–] SuspiciousCarrot78@aussie.zone 1 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (2 children)

Treating a category of content as inherently suspect based on how it was made, rather than whether it's any good. Having one tag [AI] puts a giant target on the post.

Thing is, the tag isn't neutral metadata, it's a flag.

And if 97% of projects have touched AI tooling in some form (who knows how deeply), you're not tagging outliers anymore, you're tagging the norm and implying everything untagged is the clean option.

That's not curation, that's a vibe-based blacklist.

I'm for "trust, but verify" - tagged or not. And the tagging won't work because 1) what is AI coded any more 2) do you need the tag to spot slop (which is what I think people mean by [AI])

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

Thing is, the tag isn’t neutral metadata, it’s a flag.

Correct, that is the reason people would support an AI tag...

Because for the vast majority of people, they don't want AI anything

But...

1000% not discrimination

[–] SuspiciousCarrot78@aussie.zone 1 points 4 days ago (2 children)

"vast majority don't want AI anything" is doing a lot of work there. Do they not want AI autocomplete in the IDE? AI-assisted translation? AI-generated test cases? Because if the line is "any AI involvement," the tag eats almost everything. If it's something narrower, we're back to: define the threshold.

This is a question about trust. That's a hard problem because it assumes X is innocent, Y is guilty. I'm saying X and Y are both equally guilty (or innocent) until proven otherwise and Z (slop) can be summarily executed.

Do they not want AI autocomplete in the IDE? AI-assisted translation? AI-generated test cases?

I would like no AI anything, yes.

[–] november@piefed.blahaj.zone 2 points 4 days ago

Do they not want AI autocomplete in the IDE? AI-assisted translation? AI-generated test cases?

These conversations always go like "What do you mean no one wants AI? What about [crap that no one wants]? Checkmate atheists"

Totally. Why should anyone care about whether their clothes were made by slaves or prisoners or children? Only the tightness of the stitching and fabric is a valid measure of clothing's quality. 🙄

[–] SuspiciousCarrot78@aussie.zone 1 points 4 days ago (2 children)

I'm sorry, what? Did you just equate AI use to actual child slavery?

I don't even know how to begin to respond to that.

Your analogy is irrational and frankly disgusting. Blocked.

I'll still respond for the sake of anyone else reading this. What I used was an analogy. I'm pointing out that you were dismissing the potential for moral objections to the use of AI. That is not the same as equating, but you probably know that.

You, like, other AI boosters are unable to fathom that folks' moral objections are both truly held and legitimate so you feign ignorance and shut down any critique by simultaneously clutching pearls and claiming that the thing we find morally repugnant is "inevitable." Happy to avoid future interactions. ❤

[–] mushroommunk@lemmy.today 2 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Might want to stop using the slop machines and look up these words: metaphor, analogy, example

[–] SuspiciousCarrot78@aussie.zone 1 points 4 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Sure. And while I'm doing that, you might like to google Poe's Law.

Edit: you know what - I over reacted there and I apologise. Child slavery is a hot topic button and my head went to a weird place. I'm not going to uncook the chicken by deleting my post but I will admit I probably read it wrong at 5AM.

I stand by my read that their post was deliberately inflammatory framing, but it probably wasn't intended as a "so, when did you stop beating your wife".