Unpopular Opinion
Welcome to the Unpopular Opinion community!
How voting works:
Vote the opposite of the norm.
If you agree that the opinion is unpopular give it an arrow up. If it's something that's widely accepted, give it an arrow down.
Guidelines:
Tag your post, if possible (not required)
- If your post is a "General" unpopular opinion, start the subject with [GENERAL].
- If it is a Lemmy-specific unpopular opinion, start it with [LEMMY].
Rules:
1. NO POLITICS
Politics is everywhere. Let's make this about [general] and [lemmy] - specific topics, and keep politics out of it.
2. Be civil.
Disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally attack others. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Please also refrain from gatekeeping others' opinions.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Shitposts and memes are allowed but...
Only until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.
5. No trolling.
This shouldn't need an explanation. If your post or comment is made just to get a rise with no real value, it will be removed. You do this too often, you will get a vacation to touch grass, away from this community for 1 or more days. Repeat offenses will result in a perma-ban.
6. Defend your opinion
This is a bit of a mix of rules 4 and 5 to help foster higher quality posts. You are expected to defend your unpopular opinion in the post body. We don't expect a whole manifesto (please, no manifestos), but you should at least provide some details as to why you hold the position you do.
Instance-wide rules always apply. https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/
view the rest of the comments
So you're saying OP is morally inferior because he... uses AI and... wait, does he defend cars or does he defend the position of fuckcars?
all ze did was reply and say "LLMs can be used for grammar and orthography corrections" when Foggy said I am AI because I emdash (and I'm guessing because I used a "We all … , but when … , we …" rhetoric).
well actually there's two comments ze made in the "fuckcars is the worst" thread Foggy is probably referring to, and in the other comment ze actually agrees with @foggy@lemmy.world that fuckcars is bad as "built around the mutual hatred of something" which is extremely similar to the point of being a summary to half of Foggy's argument there.
Thanks for the links I hadn't seen this. Foggy is actually making an interesting argument about the sociological and propaganda mechanisms of the modern hate train, then gets in his truck and drives over someone he suspects uses AI and backs up a few times.
It's the very "when in doubt, even the tiniest evidence shall count for the absolute moral guilt of the accused".
Probably none of us can really escape this mechanism where we have some kind of trigger.
It's remains unclear to me as well whether a "fuckcars apologist" is a pro- or anti-car stance.
Just the AI part is enough to be inferior. Can't come up with your own thoughts to defend a point you're making? Yes, you're on a lower rung of the ladder.
A complete stranger claiming without evidence that an AI has been used in the past is all it takes to be labeled inferior.
And in a thread about getting unfairly personally attacked/insulted for petty things.
Nice.