this post was submitted on 23 Jun 2026
1183 points (98.6% liked)

196

6420 readers
2479 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
 
(page 5) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Smorty@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

yesss its a weird usecase. its easy to think ur getting so much out of it while theres actually rather little to gain.

~(okay~ ~fine~ ~yes~ ~im~ ~just~ ~commenting~ ~on~ ~this~ ~post~ ~cuz~ ~its~ ~got~ ~more~ ~likes~ ~than~ ~mine...~ ~and~ ~its~ ~a~ ~screenshot!~ ~>o<~ ~grrrrr-~ ~)~

if u ask mister gpt or daddy claudius for a web search thing, you lose out on the actual sources. Which sucks cuz they are right there in the LMs context, but u dont get to see it. u dont get to see the sources.

this requires a mockup. imma be back in a few hours or so and post a mockup on Qwen community and then link it here. So here u go: have this pointless indicator showing that im working on something, maybe:

👩‍🍳 Cooked for 1 hour and 20 minutes

okay i cooked. 🍳

the post is here and if u dont care to open a link but do care to click a dropdown, here is the mockup:

mockup i mademockup showing conversation where assistant highlights the source instead of unverifiably reguaritating the content

the idea is that the LM highlights the actual sources by writing special syntax which shows up in the UI as the sources themselves. Here an example.
The LM writes:

Here is that part of the script:

<path="res://script.gd">
<from_line=7>
<to_line=7>

This gets parsed and shows up as this:


Here is that part of the script:

var whatever: String = "the content of this file is"

soooo... it doesn't regurgitate, but highlights the actual sources. The example is about code but this is easily extended to regular web search. its just text so... its the same thing.

sigh i spend too much time on lemmy.

EDIT: i moved the post from qwen community (which is on blahaj zone) to FOSAI which is not on blahaj zone cuz i feel this stuf doesnt belong here.

[–] brbposting@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Love the mockup and effort :D

if u ask mister gpt … for a web search thing … u dont get to see the sources.

Just tried the free ChatGPT (.com) and it linked me to Carfax on a Toyota pricing question. Have also seen Claude’s web UI cite sources (as of a couple weeks ago). Maybe the latest slopmachines are citing more than when you tried?

[–] Smorty@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

yea it puts some little "source" buttons but then u gotta find the exact text the LM mentioned.

soooo it would be Nixe to show the exact parts of the text that matter.

the LMs do cite, but they just link to the entire site instead of... only the exact content u care about, if that makes sense.

[–] brbposting@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

What you’re looking for, that’s one of the best uses of LLMs. No need to regurgitate anything, just be an amazing search that highlights relevant segments of original documents. Something that’s hard to even hate (“I only want to be able to find exact query match results!” is a request we don’t hear).

Instead we’re headed for Google Zero I hear

[–] Smorty@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

fair, but I would like to see the actual source instead of getting the entire page link as a source.

its like saying "its in this chapter" instead of pointing on the page i think. the first one is helpful but may be false, the second one is immediately verifiable and... very helpful.

[–] brbposting@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I think we’re on the same page.

When the tool says “it’s in this chapter”, I furthermore want it to essentially embed a screenshot of that exact reference. Then I can scroll through search results on a single page, and whatever grabs me I can open the full link.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Michal@programming.dev 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

It generally means the person made no effort and information should be taken with a grain of salt. Like "a quick Google".

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] SleeplessCityLights@programming.dev 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I like to say that I asked my buddy Chad. People then know the level of seriousness.

[–] Smorty@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 2 days ago

thats a real fun way to frame this... thinking of i asked a toddler... maybe.

[–] SCmSTR@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 2 days ago (4 children)

What about the even more tech illiterate and careless "I asked AI"?

[–] Brownie@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

How is that worse than "I asked chatgpt"?

[–] SCmSTR@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 2 days ago

Because it's even less discerning and aware than knowing the names. Tech aware people may use chatgpt or even somebody may know the name.... But people who think musk is a genius because he's successful and think AI is actually intelligent just know it as whatever defaultism that's being served to them and might notice it as AI.

It's less knowledgeable and therefore indicative of it hitting the masses.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Zacryon@feddit.org -1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (12 children)

"Hey, I have asked the LLM about a topic I am not well informed about. If it is right then [insert gained insights about topic]".

"I despise you"

I think using it as an aid to get in touch with topics one does not know much about can still be better then doing nothing about it at all. As long as you keep in mind that you have to take the answers critically and rather as a starting point than a definitive truth, I don't see an issue with it.

Extend thinking, don't externalize.

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 days ago

You know, it's going to happen anyway, maybe we could lobby to get misinformation guardrails to better the idiots.

[–] r1veRRR@feddit.org -1 points 2 days ago (9 children)

I understand hating AI for it's negative effects on the world.

What I don't understand is people pretending that it isn't generally speaking much better than manual search for most general knowledge queries.

If we count all the ads, all the SEO optimised spam, the hiding the one sentence of substance in a page long article, or the automatic summary of multiple sources, I don't see how it isn't (generally) better.

Sure, if you're doing actual scientific research, don't use AI. But everyday queries that 99% of people would do are (sadly) better served by AI.

I'm not saying that that's good, just that it's true. It's weird to pretend reality doesn't exist, just because it might involve giving AI credit for anything.

[–] texture@lemmy.world -2 points 2 days ago

finally an honest take that doesnt appear to be strictly the result of group think hate

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›