politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
So any way you slice it, this is not a loss for Republicans, they're getting precisely what they want here. Unintended consequences? Probably, but they're too blinded by their belief in their own superiority to be able to imagine any.
It just means that science communicators on the internet are becoming vitally important, so the young can still access quality information.
It might be a double edged sword, but unless Republicans can stem the flow of information on the internet (and they have and are trying different ways to do that), this is a battle that they have no chance of winning.
That'll only work until the Internet is drowned out by fake AI bot science videos and blogs, stressing certain narratives.
YouTube is already today fighting those videos, AI generated trash science stuff.
It's happening now, today. That's why I always rage against shills and bots, because it really will mean the death of communication for Humanity if it goes to its logical conclusion. And when Humanity doesn't communicate, War is not far behind.
If you pollute the virtual 'Town Square' badly enough, those who want communication to not happen will win.
It's worth mentioning that AI has a self correcting factor. If we can't tell what's AI output and what isn't, AI is going to be trained itself on AI output, which breaks it.
I'm not saying you're wrong, but it's good to remember that the "public square" is vast. Poisoning it isn't going to be as simple as poisoning 4chan.
Also, on the topic of AI, what if their information-gathering improves over time, too? Sure, there will be bad versions, but there are already bad human actors, and we've mostly learned how to identify and fact check them.
I think your scenario is certainly reasonable, but I don't think it's the only option, either. Plus, I've already seen people saying things like, "That sounds like an AI wrote it." Current and future generations may simply learn to detect AI and take any claims skeptically.
Either way, hard to say what the future holds with any real accuracy.
Well there's one Facebook, there's one Twitter/X, there's one Reddit (or two if you want to count Lemmy), etc. Not as vast as you might think.
Bots are very fast and inexpensive to use and can be done multiplicatively very easily.
I hope you're right, but I don't have your confidence in the future that you seem to do.