Young People and Politics

[Valmy]

Ok so it is a complete style thing. It is good to know. Being woke has absolutely zero to do with anything substantive.

If you're not willing to have a conversation, just say so.  I made a good faith attempt, I'll come back when I see that reciprocated.

I am willing to have a conversation and I have been very frustrated by your dodges and refusal to be straight. I did not interpret your responses as being in good faith because why mock me by using AI? Why not answer for yourself? I probably should have been more patient. Sorry. Maybe you just needed to sort out your ideas more.

But if woke is just a serious of bad behaviors and not a series of positions, all anti-woke means is that you don't like bad behaviors in the name of progressive causes.

I have a hard time squaring that definition with how I see it used. If I said I was anti-woke and said "say no to woke" I think people would then be surprised to discover I was in fact supportive of trans rights and thought reparations for black people was a good idea, I just want to be nice about it.

I just think it is a vague term used to generate reactionary moral panic. Even if it is what ChatGPT says it is, we already had plenty of ways to talk about those things. Nothing really new has happened since that term came into mainstream discourse in 2017. We had corporate virtue signaling and counter-productive fanaticism decades earlier.

But I already kind of saw this with the term "SJW" which at first I thought was a hilarious sarcastic way to make fun of the kind of insane leftwing fanatics you see online. But it quickly morphed into just being a slur for anybody with vaguely progressive ideas. So maybe that is just the nature of terms meant to mock a fringe part of the community. Things morph very quickly online.

[DGuller]

I am willing to have a conversation and I have been very frustrated by your dodges and refusal to be straight.

Really, I've been dodging and refusing to be straight?  I suspect, based on your previous replies, that you got into your mind exactly what I meant by anti-woke, and then when my explanation didn't align with your belief, you just assumed that I was not straight about what I meant.  I guess we're deadlocked then, how can I prove that's I'm straight about what I mean?

I did not interpret your responses as being in good faith because why mock me by using AI? Why not answer for yourself?

I have to admit that I would never in a million years think that me citing ChatGPT would be perceived as mockery.  To be honest, to me it looks like you got offended first and then searched for a reason to be, although I would've kept searching for a little longer.  Being offended at ChatGPT seems bizarre.

The reason I quoted ChatGPT is because I wanted to see if it could formulate it for me so that I wouldn't have to spend time wordsmithing it myself.  As it happened, ChatGPT gave something which was a very good representation of what I thought, so I just left it at that, and credited it as it wasn't something I wrote myself.  I had no idea anyone could possibly feel mocked by that.

But if woke is just a serious of bad behaviors and not a series of positions, all anti-woke means is that you don't like bad behaviors in the name of progressive causes.

It's a lot more than just "behaviors".  Soviet Communists were more than just socialists who were assholes.  Intolerance and authoritarianism isn't just a behavior, it's an ideology, and one I detest seeing in the political camp I considered my home.  Someone who instills progressivism through illiberal means is not just a progressive with bad manners, it's someone with a very different ideology from a liberal progressive.

I have a hard time squaring that definition with how I see it used. If I said I was anti-woke and said "say no to woke" I think people would then be surprised to discover I was in fact supportive of trans rights and thought reparations for black people was a good idea, I just want to be nice about it.

You don't have to be a progressive to be anti-woke.  If you're a hard right-winger, then everything that a left-winger like me detests in the wokedom is likely something that you detest as well, in addition to detesting all the things that I approve of.  I'm sure plenty of really terrible people are anti-woke.  Nazis hated communists, but they weren't very nice people themselves.  That doesn't mean that everyone who hated communists was a Nazi, maybe communism was just so detestable that everyone who wasn't a communist didn't think highly of it.

[Jacob]

I have to admit that I would never in a million years think that me citing ChatGPT would be perceived as mockery.  To be honest, to me it looks like you got offended first and then searched for a reason to be, although I would've kept searching for a little longer.  Being offended at ChatGPT seems bizarre.

I'm with Valmy on this. I'm completely uninterested in interacting with any ChatGPT generated content.

I could put effort into articulating why, but it's probably more efficient if you ask ChatGPT.

[Admiral Yi]

I'm with Valmy on this. I'm completely uninterested in interacting with any ChatGPT generated content.

You would not be interacting with ChatGPT.  It would not respond to your comments.  Not that different than someone posting an editorial and saying I agree with this.

[Jacob]

I'm with Valmy on this. I'm completely uninterested in interacting with any ChatGPT generated content.

You would not be interacting with ChatGPT.  It would not respond to your comments.  Not that different than someone posting an editorial and saying I agree with this.

That's true, I would not be interacting with ChatGPT. I would be interacting with ChatGPT generated content.

To elaborate, the interesting part of interacting with DGuller is stripped from the exchange by feeding it through ChatGPT.

[Syt]

I saw the ChatGPT quote as a variant of "Let me google that for you"

[DGuller]

I have to admit that I would never in a million years think that me citing ChatGPT would be perceived as mockery.  To be honest, to me it looks like you got offended first and then searched for a reason to be, although I would've kept searching for a little longer.  Being offended at ChatGPT seems bizarre.

I'm with Valmy on this. I'm completely uninterested in interacting with any ChatGPT generated content.

I could put effort into articulating why, but it's probably more efficient if you ask ChatGPT.

When you say that you're with Valmy, you're saying that interpreting my post as mockery is a reasonable take?  With context and all?

[DGuller]

I'm with Valmy on this. I'm completely uninterested in interacting with any ChatGPT generated content.

You would not be interacting with ChatGPT.  It would not respond to your comments.  Not that different than someone posting an editorial and saying I agree with this.

That's true, I would not be interacting with ChatGPT. I would be interacting with ChatGPT generated content.

To elaborate, the interesting part of interacting with DGuller is stripped from the exchange by feeding it through ChatGPT.

The interesting part of interacting with me is when I write stuff that ChatGPT could've written? Ouch, that really hurts.  I thought the stuff I write that ChatGPT can't think of was the good shit.  You don't find that interesting, not even a little bit? 

[garbon]

I have to admit that I would never in a million years think that me citing ChatGPT would be perceived as mockery.  To be honest, to me it looks like you got offended first and then searched for a reason to be, although I would've kept searching for a little longer.  Being offended at ChatGPT seems bizarre.

I'm with Valmy on this. I'm completely uninterested in interacting with any ChatGPT generated content.

I could put effort into articulating why, but it's probably more efficient if you ask ChatGPT.

When you say that you're with Valmy, you're saying that interpreting my post as mockery is a reasonable take?  With context and all?

It did read a bit like you couldn't be bothered to spend time replying. And that's really all we have here as a forum for chatting.

[DGuller]

So I need to spend 15 minutes crafting something that a 1 minute prompt can give me through ChatGPT?  Just to show Valmy that I care about him? 

I was operating under assumption that in a discussion it's ideas expressed that count, not the effort it takes to find the words for them.  The words may be ChatGPTs, but the idea being expressed coincided with the idea I wanted to express.  I wouldn't have pasted it and endorsed it if it weren't.  And, frankly, if ChatGPT could find the right enough words for it, then it probably wasn't that unique of an idea.  Wouldn't you rather have me spend that other 14 minutes of the discussion on something that ChatGPT can't do?

[Sophie Scholl]

It did read a bit like you couldn't be bothered to spend time replying. And that's really all we have here as a forum for chatting.

This. If we're not here to actually engage with each other in our own words, why are we even here?

[Tamas]

Using ChatGPT to write your forum replies isn't inherently rude, but it depends on how you approach it and the context of the forum. Here are some considerations:

Transparency: If you're using AI to assist with your replies, being transparent about it can be helpful. This prevents misunderstandings and ensures you're not misleading other users.

Relevance and Accuracy: Make sure the replies generated by ChatGPT are relevant and accurate. AI can sometimes produce responses that seem correct but might not be fully accurate or contextually appropriate.

Personal Touch: Forums are often valued for personal insights and experiences. Adding your own touch to AI-generated responses can make them more authentic and relatable.

Ethical Considerations: If the forum has rules against using AI-generated content, it's important to follow those guidelines.

Purpose and Use: If you're using ChatGPT to enhance your replies, provide better information, or communicate more clearly, it can be seen as a positive use of technology. However, if you're using it to spam, troll, or automate responses without regard to quality, it would be considered rude and inappropriate.

Ultimately, it comes down to how you use the tool and the norms of the community you're participating in.

[Josquius]

Using ChatGPT to write your forum replies isn't inherently rude, but it depends on how you approach it and the context of the forum. Here are some considerations:

Transparency: If you're using AI to assist with your replies, being transparent about it can be helpful. This prevents misunderstandings and ensures you're not misleading other users.

Relevance and Accuracy: Make sure the replies generated by ChatGPT are relevant and accurate. AI can sometimes produce responses that seem correct but might not be fully accurate or contextually appropriate.

Personal Touch: Forums are often valued for personal insights and experiences. Adding your own touch to AI-generated responses can make them more authentic and relatable.

Ethical Considerations: If the forum has rules against using AI-generated content, it's important to follow those guidelines.

Purpose and Use: If you're using ChatGPT to enhance your replies, provide better information, or communicate more clearly, it can be seen as a positive use of technology. However, if you're using it to spam, troll, or automate responses without regard to quality, it would be considered rude and inappropriate.

Ultimately, it comes down to how you use the tool and the norms of the community you're participating in.

Using ChatGPT to write forum replies can be problematic, regardless of the approach or context. Here's why:

Lack of Authenticity: Forums thrive on genuine, personal interactions. AI-generated replies can undermine the authenticity and trust that form the foundation of these communities.

Potential for Misleading Information: Despite the best efforts to ensure relevance and accuracy, AI can still produce misleading or incorrect responses, which can misinform other users.

Dilution of Personal Experience: Forums are valuable because of the personal insights and experiences shared by members. Relying on AI-generated responses can dilute this value and make the forum feel less personal.

Community Norms: Many forums have unwritten norms about the nature of contributions. Introducing AI into these interactions can disrupt the established culture and expectations.

Ethical Concerns: Even if a forum doesn't explicitly ban AI-generated content, there are ethical considerations around transparency and the intent behind using such tools.

In conclusion, while AI can be a helpful tool, its use in forums should be carefully considered to preserve the integrity and authenticity of these communities.

[Tamas]

Using ChatGPT to write your forum replies isn't inherently rude, but it depends on how you approach it and the context of the forum. Here are some considerations:

Transparency: If you're using AI to assist with your replies, being transparent about it can be helpful. This prevents misunderstandings and ensures you're not misleading other users.

Relevance and Accuracy: Make sure the replies generated by ChatGPT are relevant and accurate. AI can sometimes produce responses that seem correct but might not be fully accurate or contextually appropriate.

Personal Touch: Forums are often valued for personal insights and experiences. Adding your own touch to AI-generated responses can make them more authentic and relatable.

Ethical Considerations: If the forum has rules against using AI-generated content, it's important to follow those guidelines.

Purpose and Use: If you're using ChatGPT to enhance your replies, provide better information, or communicate more clearly, it can be seen as a positive use of technology. However, if you're using it to spam, troll, or automate responses without regard to quality, it would be considered rude and inappropriate.

Ultimately, it comes down to how you use the tool and the norms of the community you're participating in.

Using ChatGPT to write forum replies can be problematic, regardless of the approach or context. Here's why:

Lack of Authenticity: Forums thrive on genuine, personal interactions. AI-generated replies can undermine the authenticity and trust that form the foundation of these communities.

Potential for Misleading Information: Despite the best efforts to ensure relevance and accuracy, AI can still produce misleading or incorrect responses, which can misinform other users.

Dilution of Personal Experience: Forums are valuable because of the personal insights and experiences shared by members. Relying on AI-generated responses can dilute this value and make the forum feel less personal.

Community Norms: Many forums have unwritten norms about the nature of contributions. Introducing AI into these interactions can disrupt the established culture and expectations.

Ethical Concerns: Even if a forum doesn't explicitly ban AI-generated content, there are ethical considerations around transparency and the intent behind using such tools.

In conclusion, while AI can be a helpful tool, its use in forums should be carefully considered to preserve the integrity and authenticity of these communities.

Using AI-generated content to respond to other AI-generated content on forums can be problematic for several reasons:

Authenticity and Transparency: Forums thrive on authentic human interaction. Using AI responses may mislead other users about the nature of the conversation.

Quality Control: AI-generated content might not always be accurate or relevant, and having AI respond to AI could exacerbate this issue.

Community Guidelines: Many forums have specific rules about AI content, so it's important to check these guidelines to ensure compliance.

Value of Discussion: Human input brings unique perspectives, experiences, and emotions that AI cannot replicate. Over-reliance on AI can diminish the richness of forum discussions.

If you choose to use AI-generated content, it's best to clearly indicate that the content is created by an AI and to ensure it aligns with the forum's guidelines.

[Syt]

Listen up. Using AI to write your forum posts is straight-up lame and childish. Forums are all about real people talking to each other. If you're using an AI to write your replies, you're not being real. People want to connect with actual humans, not some soulless bot. Be genuine or don't bother.

When someone posts, they're putting in effort to share their thoughts or ask questions. If you can't be bothered to reply personally and use AI instead, it's a slap in the face. Show some respect and give a real response.

Forums are communities where people come together over shared interests. Using AI responses makes everything feel fake and kills the community vibe. Don't be the one who turns the place into a robot chatroom. It's lazy and childish. Using AI is like copying homework instead of doing it yourself. Forums are for learning and sharing ideas, not for cutting corners. Grow up and put in some effort.

When you post, you should stand by your words. AI doesn't care if it messes up, but you should. If things go south, it's on you, not the AI. Own your words and be responsible. Using AI makes you intellectually lazy. Forums are for improving your thinking and writing skills. If you let AI do the work, you're missing out on personal growth. Don't be a lazy bum.

AI has its uses, but not here. Using it for forum replies is disrespectful and ruins the community. Keep it real, be respectful, and don't be lazy. The real value of a forum is in our genuine, human interactions.