this post was submitted on 23 Jun 2026
1183 points (98.6% liked)
196
6420 readers
2550 users here now
Community Rules
You must post before you leave
Be nice. Assume others have good intent (within reason).
Block or ignore posts, comments, and users that irritate you in some way rather than engaging. Report if they are actually breaking community rules.
Use content warnings and/or mark as NSFW when appropriate. Most posts with content warnings likely need to be marked NSFW.
Most 196 posts are memes, shitposts, cute images, or even just recent things that happened, etc. There is no real theme, but try to avoid posts that are very inflammatory, offensive, very low quality, or very "off topic".
Bigotry is not allowed, this includes (but is not limited to): Homophobia, Transphobia, Racism, Sexism, Abelism, Classism, or discrimination based on things like Ethnicity, Nationality, Language, or Religion.
Avoid shilling for corporations, posting advertisements, or promoting exploitation of workers.
Proselytization, support, or defense of authoritarianism is not welcome. This includes but is not limited to: imperialism, nationalism, genocide denial, ethnic or racial supremacy, fascism, Nazism, Marxism-Leninism, Maoism, etc.
Avoid AI generated content.
Avoid misinformation.
Avoid incomprehensible posts.
No threats or personal attacks.
No spam.
Moderator Guidelines
Moderator Guidelines
- Don’t be mean to users. Be gentle or neutral.
- Most moderator actions which have a modlog message should include your username.
- When in doubt about whether or not a user is problematic, send them a DM.
- Don’t waste time debating/arguing with problematic users.
- Assume the best, but don’t tolerate sealioning/just asking questions/concern trolling.
- Ask another mod to take over cases you struggle with, if you get tired, or when things get personal.
- Ask the other mods for advice when things get complicated.
- Share everything you do in the mod matrix, both so several mods aren't unknowingly handling the same issues, but also so you can receive feedback on what you intend to do.
- Don't rush mod actions. If a case doesn't need to be handled right away, consider taking a short break before getting to it. This is to say, cool down and make room for feedback.
- Don’t perform too much moderation in the comments, except if you want a verdict to be public or to ask people to dial a convo down/stop. Single comment warnings are okay.
- Send users concise DMs about verdicts about them, such as bans etc, except in cases where it is clear we don’t want them at all, such as obvious transphobes. No need to notify someone they haven’t been banned of course.
- Explain to a user why their behavior is problematic and how it is distressing others rather than engage with whatever they are saying. Ask them to avoid this in the future and send them packing if they do not comply.
- First warn users, then temp ban them, then finally perma ban them when they break the rules or act inappropriately. Skip steps if necessary.
- Use neutral statements like “this statement can be considered transphobic” rather than “you are being transphobic”.
- No large decisions or actions without community input (polls or meta posts f.ex.).
- Large internal decisions (such as ousting a mod) might require a vote, needing more than 50% of the votes to pass. Also consider asking the community for feedback.
- Remember you are a voluntary moderator. You don’t get paid. Take a break when you need one. Perhaps ask another moderator to step in if necessary.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I wish i could tell these people my honest thoughts about their idiocy but that would cause... issues...
I got a promotion for saying my thoughts and bringing receipts/studies. Turns out my promotion was so I could play devil’s advocate so the AI teams could make their processes and models’ messaging stronger against criticism. Anyone hiring?
it's ok, they won't lash out at you on it, not at least until they ask chatGPT if they should be mad
so what if someone used a service you dont personally respect, to find sources for their inquiry? like genuinely why are you so personally upset by someone saying the phrase? did you used to hate wikipedia too?
What? This kind of person can literally be a danger to people around them if you look at the most upvoted comment under this post. Thats not some kind of preference issue. Its people putting their and other peoples lives into the hands of a bullshit generators. If i hear that someone makes important decisions based on LLM outputs i will disregard anything they say.
i think youre generalizing way too much here. disregarding everything someone says bc they source info in a manner below your standards is silly to me. should i disregard everything anyone says that watches legacy news media? cmon
Legacy news media is much more reliable at what it does than LLMs. You can almost always trace back the sources, its not a blackbox. Also news arent thought automating like LLMs. People directly ask LLMs what to do and then do exactly what it says. Thats not how it works with most news media, because they dont give you step by step instructions on how to do things, just what the facts are according to their sources. LLMs remove the last layer of critical thinking that people were barely still forced to have.
People use them for medical, psychological, dietary, technical, pet and childcare advice. All things that can seriously endanger them or others.
no i cannot almost always trace back sources of news media, where have you gotten that idea from?
also, if you want sources from an llm, just say "give me sources" if youre using a model that is so old that it doesnt automatically do that anyway.
"People directly ask LLMs what to do and then do exactly what it says" - people also chose not to do said things, or push back and converse. not everyone is a one promt npc.
News media often reports factually inaccurate or plain false information, i still interact with people that watch it.
An LLM fundamentally knows nothing about the world, only how to put together language in a statistically convincing manner. It makes no empirical observations about the world, only about how words connect to different words, which is definitionally not knowledge about anything other than language. It does not matter how powerful this technique becomes, it will always have this limitation.
The real use cases for LLM or machine learning are pattern recognition tasks that would be impractical for a person to manually do. If the task has a narrowly defined goal with predictable error rates that can be accounted for, you can parse impossible amounts of data without making any leaps in reasoning. All uncertainties are accounted for. Machine learning has been used this way in research for far longer than most people realize, and it has enabled analysis that would not have been possible otherwise.
Asking an LLM to give you factual information or even asking it to summarize sources is not a narrowly defined task with predictable inaccuracies. There is no real way to know the error rates of questions you ask an LLM, and even wording the question slightly differently can result in a different outcome. All you can do with an LLM is ask it for sources, using it as a supplement for a search engine(what I've always thought they should use the tech for), but the summaries it gives you are basically a waste of processing power.
The key to all of this is critical thinking, something LLM use actively atrophies. It has no consistent viewpoints and does not think like a person. It cannot gather information firsthand and can only confide with others for all its information about the world. It does not matter how good machine learning gets; at the end of the day it is either reliant on the information of others, or just spewing bullshit that sounds like what others would say. Just cut out the middle man and interface directly with people
Every major newspaper article or news show will always contain "according to" or "we asked" or another version of this. They generally dont lie outright, only by omission or by using questionable sources.
Either way you can try to argue all you want, the reality is that people are dying left and right because of LLM automation bias and its only gonna get worse. The job market (or what was left of it) has been completely destroyed by automated screening tools. Doctors and lawyers are getting caught outsourcing their thinking to them and misjudging at higher than before rates.
regarding your message, the key word is "generally"
llm provide a service within which users can generally get information at request, with sources and occasionally useful insight.
i think theres a level of equivalence here that supports my position.