this post was submitted on 27 Dec 2024
-36 points (14.0% liked)
Asklemmy
44331 readers
642 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- [email protected]: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
What if it worked 90%? It doesn't need to be perfect, just better.
I'd like to see an experiment.
An injustice against one of us is an injustice against all of us. 90% isn't good enough. Hell, 99% isn't good enough.
But hunan moderators aren't perfect either. And they are often biased.
But they can be checked and balanced by other moderators unless it's a one mod/one admin system; in which case then it's just a personal fief. Where's the checks and/or balances for theftbox moderation?
Y'know, if I had a physical watch, I'd be looking at my wrist really condescendingly right now.
AIs can be checked too. And judged, tweaked, etc. Obviously
Groups of moderators can be just as biased as individual moderators. More so even. Given the amplifying effects of echo chambers.
Human moderators who tweak the AI settings are still biased. So you haven't solved any problem by throwing AI in the middleof it all.
I sure as shit wouldn't. Did you even read any of what frauddogg just said? Genuine question because they explained pretty clearly why it is a terrible and stupid idea.
Yes I read it. I just don't think it significates.
And this is something you should reexamine about yourself then if you don't understand the significance of racism and other bigoted biases in AI.
I am pretty much done arguing with you because you're a creep and a troll.
Nice word-a-day calender, creepazoid
You don't even want to see an experiment? But that's the pudding.
I repeat. Did you actually read any of the concrete argument laid out before you or are you just being willfully obtuse.
Go look at YouTube, they are already doing it over there.
And it's horrible. Sometimes my comments are taken down automatically, but YouTube never tells me why, so I don't know what I need to change, and it's even hard to find out if my comments have been taken down. The fastest way is for me to write a comment and then wait 10 seconds and then try to edit it.
You're asking for something better but what's your baseline? What are you measuring? What's your metric? How would you know if it got better, and more importantly, how would we as a user base in general know if it got better?