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

meadowlander

(5,044 posts)
21. Isn't that like asking whether YouTube videos or links to Twitter posts should be a violation of the terms of service?
Thu Dec 4, 2025, 02:59 AM
Thursday

AI is just a tool. It's what you use it for that is potentially irritating or detrimental to the community.

We already have ToS rules against spam, right wing talking points, kooky or extremist content, and graphic content, copyrighted material, etc.

What is the specific mischief posed by allowing people to use AI as part of their post that is not already covered by those rules? And, if so, wouldn't a more effective approach be adding that mischief to the list of no-no's than having endless debate over whether something was AI generated or not.

I mean I guess we could try to have a more explicit rule against posted misinformation that goes beyond "don't post right wing talking points" but I think that's going to be hard to enforce.

I don't personally have a horse in this race. I don't see the point of posting on a message board for fun if you are going to let AI write your posts for you. But I also don't see how a ban on AI would really work or what the justification for it would be. You'd waste a lot of time and resources trying to enforce it and you'd potentially make it harder for people to get the benefits (using it for research, quickly generated images for those of us who aren't remotely artistic, etc.)

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Not alerted - but somehow clearly identified - maybe with a color identifier as with videos, etc? NewHendoLib Wednesday #1
changed my vote from yes... ret5hd Wednesday #6
I agree, identification is better than alerting synni Yesterday #31
Based on WHAT?? It is in no way a violation of site rules. Jack Valentino Wednesday #2
But it should be. paleotn Wednesday #4
NO. Jack Valentino Wednesday #5
That's it! Just so no to fakes. paleotn Wednesday #7
It's unreliable. One expert after another has said that chatbots are built in such a way that they tell you what you eppur_se_muova Thursday #18
Alerted on for what? Renew Deal Wednesday #3
Why not? 3825-87867 Wednesday #8
I think a better question is whether AI posts should be a violation of the TOS. Scrivener7 Wednesday #9
I voted yes, but agree with u berniesandersmittens Wednesday #10
Yes, definitely. Scrivener7 Wednesday #11
Its a context thing. Eventually the AI bubble will burst but... FascismIsDeath Wednesday #12
Definitely no womanofthehills Wednesday #13
That information can be found easily via Google or other search engines and does NOT require highplainsdem Yesterday #32
Is the 3rd option written by AI? Kaleva Wednesday #14
LOL mr715 Wednesday #16
Thank you for picking up on that ! :D At first, I tried to write an AI-sounding post which I thought would capture ... eppur_se_muova Thursday #19
I don't know to be honest Niagara Wednesday #15
How does anyone feel comfortable posting AI slop under their own name? hunter Wednesday #17
Labelled KentuckyWoman Thursday #20
Isn't that like asking whether YouTube videos or links to Twitter posts should be a violation of the terms of service? meadowlander Thursday #21
Actually yes, theoretically no? jfz9580m Thursday #22
This is a confusing question jfz9580m Thursday #23
We need to push back against AI, but with a caveat... carpetbagger Yesterday #24
One issue i see is people spamming the board with some slop video with no context in the body fujiyamasan Yesterday #25
I think it's EarlG's call canetoad Yesterday #26
If the AI-created content violates the TOS - yes. Ms. Toad Yesterday #27
Well, I'm open to it, but it should be clearly clarified as being modified, etc. Just like photographs, videos, etc. SWBTATTReg Yesterday #28
I'm up for it. usonian Yesterday #29
Based on my own selfish entertainment, I'd say "no" simply because flvegan Yesterday #30
Important to check what is correct whether from humans, AI, or a million typing monkeys. RoeVWade Yesterday #33
Wouldn't it be better to campaign for alerting on false information before AI content? muriel_volestrangler Yesterday #34
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Should AI-created content...»Reply #21