Personally I think it feels kinda dystopian for an AI to be deciding what human beings are allowed to say; _especially_ if it's highly effective. There was a c

Personally I think it feels kinda dystopian for an AI to be deciding what human beings are allowed to say; _especially_ if it's highly effective. There was a comment from another user I favorited a while back which reflects my thoughts on the topic of AI-driven moderation pretty well[1]: > I find censorship via algorithms extremely scary. There will be false positives and false negatives and there is absolutely zero recourse. Censorship by algorithms is a perfect expression of bureaucracy. In perfect bureaucracies, responsibilty is spread so thinly that it's impossible to determine who is responsible for a mistake. With algorithms, there's actually no human on the hook at all. Are you going to blame the programmers? > By all means, use machine learning to flag posts so humans can look at them. But automating the removal of content and the banning of human users is a road I strongly suspect we will regret going down. If the volume of content is sufficient so that you need to use algorithms to remove human-generated content then I'd say it's time to reconsider whether that content should be removed at all. [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19867975 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19867975