this post was submitted on 09 Sep 2026
560 points (99.1% liked)

Fuck AI

8171 readers
2819 users here now

"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"

A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.

AI, in this case, refers to LLMs, GPT technology, and anything listed as "AI" meant to increase market valuations.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The band Muse has surrendered its Instagram and X handles to Meta after the release of its new AI agent, Muse.

The English rock band Muse has been renamed on Instagram and X from “Muse” to “museband.”

Despite the band Muse having had its Instagram account since 2012 and its X account since 2008, it has seemingly surrendered the handle to Mark Zuckerberg’s newest AI agent.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] SarahValentine@pawb.social 18 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (4 children)

They had a choice. They chose to advertise themselves on the "Grandma's Racist Rants And Old White Guys With Sunglasses Who Hate Poor People" platform. Color me shocked that it's turning out to have been a bad choice.

[–] LotrOrc@lemmy.world 15 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

They've had their accounts since 08 and 12. Its harder for a band of their size and fame to just leave these platforms than it is for a regular person, and most regular people still go on Instagram at least if not Twitter as well.

[–] SarahValentine@pawb.social 3 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

You say "hard" like it's a thing they are in some way bein restrained from doing. I mean, by anything other than their own greed.

[–] neatchee@piefed.social 3 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

I squat my name on Twitter because I don't want it taken. I don't use the platform except to log in periodically to keep it active.

I would be pissed if it were taken from me.

Does that make me greedy?

[–] SarahValentine@pawb.social 1 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

I squat my name on Twitter because I don’t want it taken. I don’t use the platform except to log in periodically to keep it active.

Sounds reasonable if you give a shit about what people who still use Xitter think. Doesn't sound anything like what Muse and artists like them do though.

Does that make me greedy?

No, but what you describe doesn't generalize to the real situation we're talking about here.

[–] neatchee@piefed.social 2 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

It's not that I care what people on that platform think. It's that I care what shows up in search engines and whether my brand is diluted by people other than me.

And that is exactly the same thing at stake for bands and the like.

Headlines don't get unprinted. If Muse quit Facebook or Instagram, especially after already having a presence there, it would be trivial for someone to swipe their brand identity and start posting horrible shit to generate headlines. And that is a bell that can't be unrung, in addition to having material cost to address if and when it happens.

And I haven't even mentioned the network effect.

Brand management is really difficult and even more delicate. Maintaining a token presence on some of the most popular platforms in the world is a no-brainer for anyone who cares about their brand.

I think it's fair to ask extremely popular, highly visible bands and such to take a stand and loudly quit these platforms.

I don't think it's fair to expect it of them.

[–] SarahValentine@pawb.social 1 points 3 hours ago

It’s not that I care what people on that platform think. It’s that I care what shows up in search engines and whether my brand is diluted by people other than me.

So get an actually original brand name and sue people who fuck with you.

Headlines don’t get unprinted. If Muse quit Facebook or Instagram, especially after already having a presence there, it would be trivial for someone to swipe their brand identity and start posting horrible shit to generate headlines.

And it would be equally trivial for anyone to communicate to the world that they do not use facebook or insta, and that if anyone shows up there under the brand name they're a fake. It's not a parking lot. They're not in your space. If they impersonate you that's, again, something you could take them to court over. At no point are you required to support a pro-fascist platform by showing up to make sure nobody pretends to be you in a place nobody who cares about you should ever go. Holy shit, how is this hard to grasp.

[–] xtr0n@sh.itjust.works 44 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

I absolutely hate that so many people still use these shit platforms run my the worst people on the planet. That said, if you are famous, there is a dilemma where, if you refuse to use these platforms, someone will make a fake account that purports to be you.

[–] Rhaedas@fedia.io 12 points 7 hours ago

Not just famous. There are impersonators everywhere, low effort and cost and you probably won't be punished for it. It's the next level of spam.

[–] AmbitiousProcess@piefed.social 23 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

They chose to advertise themselves on the “Grandma’s Racist Rants And Old White Guys With Sunglasses Who Hate Poor People” platform.

While true, they also advertised themselves on a platform most Americans use.

Say what you want about someone's ability to not use a social media platform in the first place, but if you're a band that depends on... people, it's hard to just decide not to put yourself out there on a platform where so many people are.

The network effect is real. It's where people's friends, family, celebrities, bands, etc all are. Leaving means leaving people who are important to you.

A lot of people find it easier to leave platforms like Twitter now, because the platform is such a shell of its former self that it doesn't even provide what many people originally came there for, but if you're on Instagram, Facebook, etc, it still often provides people with easy communication to/from family and friends, and organizations like bands with access to an audience, promotion, visibility, etc.

Leaving the platform means leaving fans, and giving up visibility. I wish everyone could just quit Meta's platforms and crush the company, but there's a very simple collective action problem at play here that makes it very difficult, don't discount that.

[–] jtrek@startrek.website 7 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

I think it applies differently to famous, rich, figures who already have an audience. They could loudly announce they're leaving facebook. A chunk of their fans would follow. They're already rich, they can tank losing some fans. It would be better for everyone to get people off Facebook platforms and onto open ones.

Some local band that's struggling to get their first EP out I could maybe cut some slack on going to where the people are.

[–] AmbitiousProcess@piefed.social 3 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

That's fair. Still, I do think it's a tad unreasonable to expect of people, when it can significantly impact their popularity and thus their income, when the actual effect of them leaving is usually that... essentially nothing happens to the company they're leaving from.

Unfortunately, Facebook and its users likely won't care much if someone leaves the platform, as long as they can keep scrolling. It's gotta be on a very large scale, with a lot of people giving up portions of their audience before more people start genuinely moving to alternatives.

[–] jtrek@startrek.website 5 points 5 hours ago

Sure, like King Gizzard left spotify and put their music on bandcamp. They got some press about it. Some of my friends went to bandcamp to get their music, even. But the vast majority of people still just use spotify. People don't care about things, especially if it would be inconvenient.

It's still good to get people off private platforms.

[–] Waterpumpee@lemmus.org 2 points 5 hours ago

after being in the industry for a quartercentury, they prolly belong to that grandma old guy w sunglasses group themselves haha.