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 -
Actually, this exact perspective is the thing that the median person hates about AI. The water usage isn't the issue, the slop isn't the issue, the fact that AI doesn't produce any value for the median person and instead makes much of their life notably worse isn't the issue - the issue is that pompous 'tech elites' think they're better than us.
I'm personally of the opinion that the AI ecology in its current instantiation is evil in almost every single way, but the biggest way it is evil is that it's a transparent attempt to destroy the lives of everyone who isn't a part of that ecology. It's a predatory economic model, and the prey is that median person that you have such derision for.
People caught up in slop anti-growth and anti-human ideologies are worse than people who aren't. You weren't born this way, you can stop being worse than people who are better than you instantly by coming to your senses. No one is forcing you to identify with a hateful dead end black pilled ideology who's arguments are soldiers because they have no actual arguments. In every way that matters you're no different to the communists who cope with their own failures and salve their egos by inventing conspiracies of the rich. And the most pathetic element of it is this pure bullshit demand to have your feelings coddled without there being any condescension. There is no way to be this careful about hurting your feelings without condescension, it's not possible.
"It's not any of the things I say it is, it's that you don't pretend to like the people saying ignorant bullshit trying to stop progress convincingly enough"
Give me a break.
Thanks for reinforcing my point! Somehow, in your view, it's impossible to disagree with your take on AI without being 'pathetic' 'anti-human' who can't 'cope with their own failures'.
I rest my case.
Certainly it's possible to disagree with my position. But you've not disagreed with it, you've explicitly said the problem isn't my position, it's the rhetoric used, it's your feelings. I have a number of takes on AI that I think have very reasonable foils, I've gone over them at length. If you want to engage with them then please do so. But if your demand is that I show respect for slopulist liars who have contempt for the truth then I refuse.
Sorry, no. If you just go back and look, I originally responded to your claim that
by arguing that the median person's position on AI is essentially rooted in the (correct) belief that AI and tech bros in general are contemptuous of them and their concerns. This is not a 'slop' view nor is it a 'demand to have your feelings coddled'. It plays out in all areas of the AI ecology, from billionaires paying off city councils to build data centers that almost every constituent opposes, to companies firing large parts of their workforce because of 'AI efficiencies' that don't actually exist, to the degradation of our public education system by replacing teachers with AI tools that don't work... shall I go on? AI boosters are deliberately and with malice aforethought trying to destroy the lives of the 'median person' and treating that as just an unfortunate externality of their race towards godhood. It's the very definition of evil.
If the efficiencies don't exist, it follows that the layoffs can't possibly be AI's fault.
I guess you haven't been following this? Or know anyone who works in a big company?
Huge amounts of layoffs have occured predicated on the expectation of efficiencies from AI. Some such companies, once they discovered that AI did not improve efficiency, have been forced to rehire the people they fired, while others just used it as an excuse to cut down their workforce a la private equity, disregarding the long term health of the company. Either way, it's harming workers.
Of course I know him. He's me.
It's a fig leaf to lay off the, frankly speaking, terrible workers who got over hired during covid exuberance in the early 2020s, or otherwise for floundering businesses to shed workers in a bid to become profitable.
I'm not aware of any companies begging fired employees to return a la DOGE. Examples?
Since you didn't bother to Google it, I won't bother putting in too much effort either. Here's a link: https://www.forbes.com/sites/terdawn-deboe/2026/05/21/companies-fired-workers-for-ai-now-they-want-them-back/
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
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link