Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

highplainsdem

(59,701 posts)
Sun Dec 28, 2025, 11:51 AM 2 hrs ago

The Guardian's Bluesky posts on articles rarely get many replies. Today one asked if AI relationships are good for us.

Could AI relationships actually be good for us?

The Guardian (@theguardian.com) 2025-12-28T12:52:15.099Z



Over 200 replies so far, overwhelmingly negative, and only 22 likes. Some of the replies reminding people that The Guardian now has a "strategic partnership" with OpenAI.

In addition to the replies on the page for that post, there are 143 reposts...but only 3 of those are simple reposts without any comment added above, the type of repost often indicating agreement.

140 of the 143 are quote posts, with scathing comments above the reposted Guardian message. Such as:

That's easy
No

Heads up. Someone just shoved a bunch of AI up the Guardian's ass.

"Could drinking all the chemicals you find in a lab make you into a super hero?
It could, but only if you drink those chemicals responsibly."

This really should have a "Sponsored Content" label.
This ain't journalism, it's advertising.

1 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The Guardian's Bluesky posts on articles rarely get many replies. Today one asked if AI relationships are good for us. (Original Post) highplainsdem 2 hrs ago OP
Kick SheltieLover 1 hr ago #1
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The Guardian's Bluesky po...