5 ms·

Why are so many comments working so hard to dismiss this article? There’s a mountain of research showing how social media is damaging kids and the increases in

Why are so many comments working so hard to dismiss this article? There’s a mountain of research showing how social media is damaging kids and the increases in suicides back this up. Yet somehow tearing this article apart is the solution? Is it just a mass of AI apologists who think it is just a harmless tool, like a gun or an atom bomb? Or is it just “this is something I like and the consequences don’t hurt me so everyone else can eff off.”

aaron695 3y ago
[dead]
twright 3y ago
There is a contrarianism that runs on HN and adjacent communities that also comes with a myopia of empathy. I observe about one article per month where there's a comments section like this expressing opinions that if you ever were to say out-loud in a social setting you would get some weird looks.
scarface_74 3y ago
This isn’t about the dangers of social media. This is about the ability for anyone to log into a site for free and create a convincing looking nude of an underage girl for free and spread it.
dkjaudyeqooe 3y ago
Your comment is so fraught and keeps on jumping around so I can't figure out what you'd like to see happen. But regulation of people's behaviour is how we deal with these things. There should be consequences for abusing other people no matter what tools you use. If you're talking about banning AI ("AI apologists"?) then were do you draw the line? People use cars to kidnap children and rape and murder them, should be ban cars? AI has positive and negative uses just like cars.
- demondemidi 3y ago
  That's because you're trying to frame my statement on your terms, rather than catching your breath and thinking. Probably because you didn't understand my point but are really excited to tell me how wrong I am. So let me restate it a different way. I'm gravely concerned with the destructive potential of AI and the exploitation in this article is just one of hundreds of negative consequences. Yet advocates of AI are shitting on any attempt to constrain it, and instead are tripping over themselves to monetize it, risks be damned.
  - miohtama 3y ago
    In this particular case of article, the culprits where the boys in the same school. There has been bullying in schools forever. There are social norms, rules and laws to deal with it. In the worst case, you can sue for defamation. For this particular article case, there is no need for new laws or rules. Just take the boys, give them a harsh warning, public humiliation and if it repeats then suspend from the school. Whether there is AI or no AI, it is irrelevant. Whether this is relevant or not about the harms of social media is not related to the AI. If the article headline would be "social media gives new ways to bullying" it would be more to correct. However the article headline is about AI, and is thus a clickbait, and dishonest in its narrative.
  - dkjaudyeqooe 3y ago
    Your emotive, ad-hominem and broad, unsubstantiated claims don't help your argument. There are risks with AI as with anything, and there can be regulation of anything, it's just a question of what, which you don't go into a all. To use your language: it seems you just want to shit on AI and people who want to use and develop it, and these victims are little more than a convenient sensation for you to push your pet peeve.
    - demondemidi 3y ago
      > Your emotive, ad-hominem and broad, unsubstantiated claims don't help your argument. Neither do yours. Peace be upon you.

aaron695 3y ago

[dead]

twright 3y ago

There is a contrarianism that runs on HN and adjacent communities that also comes with a myopia of empathy. I observe about one article per month where there's a comments section like this expressing opinions that if you ever were to say out-loud in a social setting you would get some weird looks.

scarface_74 3y ago

This isn’t about the dangers of social media. This is about the ability for anyone to log into a site for free and create a convincing looking nude of an underage girl for free and spread it.

dkjaudyeqooe 3y ago

Your comment is so fraught and keeps on jumping around so I can't figure out what you'd like to see happen. But regulation of people's behaviour is how we deal with these things. There should be consequences for abusing other people no matter what tools you use. If you're talking about banning AI ("AI apologists"?) then were do you draw the line? People use cars to kidnap children and rape and murder them, should be ban cars? AI has positive and negative uses just like cars.

demondemidi 3y ago
That's because you're trying to frame my statement on your terms, rather than catching your breath and thinking. Probably because you didn't understand my point but are really excited to tell me how wrong I am. So let me restate it a different way. I'm gravely concerned with the destructive potential of AI and the exploitation in this article is just one of hundreds of negative consequences. Yet advocates of AI are shitting on any attempt to constrain it, and instead are tripping over themselves to monetize it, risks be damned.
- miohtama 3y ago
  In this particular case of article, the culprits where the boys in the same school. There has been bullying in schools forever. There are social norms, rules and laws to deal with it. In the worst case, you can sue for defamation. For this particular article case, there is no need for new laws or rules. Just take the boys, give them a harsh warning, public humiliation and if it repeats then suspend from the school. Whether there is AI or no AI, it is irrelevant. Whether this is relevant or not about the harms of social media is not related to the AI. If the article headline would be "social media gives new ways to bullying" it would be more to correct. However the article headline is about AI, and is thus a clickbait, and dishonest in its narrative.
- dkjaudyeqooe 3y ago
  Your emotive, ad-hominem and broad, unsubstantiated claims don't help your argument. There are risks with AI as with anything, and there can be regulation of anything, it's just a question of what, which you don't go into a all. To use your language: it seems you just want to shit on AI and people who want to use and develop it, and these victims are little more than a convenient sensation for you to push your pet peeve.
  - demondemidi 3y ago
    > Your emotive, ad-hominem and broad, unsubstantiated claims don't help your argument. Neither do yours. Peace be upon you.