There is no reason for a bot to be able to access or post on federated social networks if the goal is to make social media humane.

For this reason, bots should be heavily disallowed from posting content to or accessing content from federated social media.

  • younity@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    That leads me to another topic, I disagree. You know scientists always trying to make things happen but never asking if they “Should”?

    That’s how I feel about “good” bot content, where, sure, a bot can post something that generates a novel human discussion, but I think this is also inherently bad and is as close as you can get to providing a “turn-key community brainwash application” to anyone who wants it.

    IE: the bot posts good stuff, we all pat the bot on the back with upvotes because it wasn’t horrible, but then we trust the bot, people trust the bot, then there is no way for us to know if the bot is compromised, what if the bot is compromised, and is slowly but surely, algorithmically recommending content to divide and confuse, FUD, etc…

    This is my concern, and lambast me for paranoia, but I’m not wrong, and this is one reason reddit went down the shithole.

    • MimicJar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I mean humans run bots. So you’re ok with all those things you said as long as a human posts it?

      Bots follow the same rules as humans. I’m happy to discuss rules for all types of posting. Once we agree then bots follow the same rules.

      The truth is if you ban bots, bots are just going to pretend to be human. Even if you allow bots, some will pretend to be human. As long as everyone is following the rules, we’ll be fine.

      • younity@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Humans literally run bots to do things that they wouldn’t/couldn’t/or shouldn’t DO. Your logic is beyond reproach.

    • fearout@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      You know scientists always trying to make things happen but never asking if they “Should”?

      I’ve never seen someone use this as an argument, only as a joke. Can you provide some examples of the things that you think scientists tried to make happen without thinking whether they should or not?

      Also, how is user-specific trust at play here? I never even look at usernames, instead I will upvote or ignore posts based on their content. I don’t think you can really ease Lemmy/kbin users into believing some divisive nonsense that easily.