This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
How about a different kind of AI culture war? I speak of course of non-consensual pornography generation. The most outrageous article I read about this recently was probably this AP article: Boys at her school shared AI-generated, nude images of her. After a fight, she was the one expelled. The girl in question is 13 and she started a fight on a school bus with one of the boys later charged with a crime for sharing the images.
It turns out that finding apps that advertise this kind of functionality is not hard. In fact, part of the reason I bring this up is it seems this capability is integrated into one of the largest AIs: Grok. There's been some controversy on X over the last couple days after Grok allegedly generated pornographic images of a couple minor girls. Additionally the bot's "media" tab was disabled, allegedly due to the discovery lots of people were using the bot to make pornographic edits of other people's pictures. Though the media tab is gone I did not find it very hard to get Grok to link me its own posts with these kinds of edits.
There is, I think understandably, a lot of controversy going around about this. It's not that it was previously impossible to make this kind of content but the fidelity and availability was much more limited and certainly required more technical skill. Being something you can do without even leaving your favorite social media app seems like something of a game changer.
Frankly I am unsure where to go with this as a policy matter. Should someone be liable for this? Criminal or civil? Who? Just the generating user? The tool that does the generating? As a general matter I have some intuitions about AI conduct being tortious but difficulty locating who should be liable.
If someone did this to my daughter I'd slap the shit out of them. I'd also be proud of my daughter for taking the matter into her own hands and beating the shit out of them.
Conversely, if my son did this I would hope he'd get his ass kicked by the girl and if her father came looking for him I would say I understand bro have at him just don't send him to the hospital.
I think I'm expressing majority feelings about this. Surely we can form rules around this accordingly.
I really hope you're not. "Don't beat up little children" shouldn't be controversial IMO.
Would you beat the snot out of a little girl for being nasty to your son, or is this treatment reserved purely for penis-havers?
Yeah and it's OK that we recognize gendered solutions are appropriate. If a man in a social setting is being aggressively unpleasant you will threaten to hit him and then follow up on it, if a woman is doing the same you will call her an annoying bitch and that everyone thinks she's fat and ugly - it will inflict roughly equivalent damage.
Firstly, beating somebody up i.e. violently assaulting them is not equivalent to calling them a bitch, and I cannot take seriously a frame that considers otherwise.
Secondly, re: gendered solutions, please see my response to @hydroacetylene. If you are willing to apply your 'gendered solutions' fairly, then fair enough. If, however, you advocate for maximum harshness against men while chickening out whenever it is time to apply your 'gendered solutions' to women, then from the recipient's POV that is ultimately indistinguishable from straight-up hatred of men and I'm not going along with it.
Your desire to reframe the issue in your favour suggests that I am more correct than you are comfortable with admitting (Beat up becomes violently assault, "Call a bitch" instead of "Verbal assault, harassed and bullied). These are roughly equivalent because they likely cause temporary harm quickly, and don't have much lasting effect, a quick "Smarten up" if you will.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
no
Definitely. If you scale physical and mental harm either linearly or on some sort of curve, these are within 1 rank of eachother at the furthest (and I think roughly equivalent)
5: murdered
4: permanently maimed (legs amputated, blinded)
3: injury with long recovery (broken hip, ruptured tendon)
2: injury with short recovery (sprained wrist, strep throat)
1: painful injury with no loss of function (slapped very hard, wasp sting)
0: nothing
5: total pariah (exiled, stripped of all social status)
4: fired and shunned (harvey weinstein, permanently life and livelihood altering, sam bankman-fried)
3: humiliating disruption (acrimonious divorce, demoted and forced to change careers, star wars kid?)
2: mild in length or severity of mockery (that lawyer who couldnt turn off the cat-effect on his zoom trial, a local clergyman leaves his microphone on while he uses the toilet)
1: typical bullying (a schoolmate who calls you a fag every week, mean-spirited gossip)
0: nothing
both of these are clearly in the 1-2 zone at worst. Obviously the world is very large and people have different goals, social realities, pain tolerances etc. But I'm quite confident in my assessment. By a week or 2 your bruises from your beating will heal, and everyone will forgot about the party where you got called a fat-slut and ran out crying.
Just because you can assign star ratings to them doesn't mean they will be equivalent. Many injuries, even minor, lead to permanently worse functiioning level.
Those are numbers, not stars, but your objection doesn't disprove anything I said. It's nearly a non-sequitur.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
While I think your argument largely makes sense, I would choose being called a "faggot" over being punched hard in the stomach 1000 times out of 1000
Like it's not even a question I have to think about, the answer is so obvious.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link