RE: https://social.coop/@scottjenson/116352522288234148
shameful junk
this is commercial UX posturing 101 that amounts to the complaint that generative AI positivity does not get engagement on mastodon.
"community", "inclusivity", "bring more voices", "marginalised communities"
the problem?
Mastodon lacks an algorithmic feed that boosts AI positivity posts
"The Mastodon team is finally getting some traction" is an important phrase to consider.
Mastodon has traction. It is an internet cockroach that will out last any other current social network.
But that kind of traction is not recognised in this context because this is not a good faith post made by a serious person
Claiming the argument is not made in good faith by a serious person seems to miss the mark pretty badly. Scott Jenson does not match this description, and we should do better.
Similarly, @carnage4life does not appear to be some huge AI evangelist. [Edit: It seems I'm probably wrong here]
To me the story here is that Mastodon gives less voice to central nodes in the network, instead distributing the conversation. That may indeed be bad for journalists, but maybe good for us.
@fasterandworse
I guess like me he was oblivious to the broader agenda of this poster. The whole debate looks very different before and after learning more about @carnage4life.
I maintain that it's made in good faith, but that of course does not mean that it's a good point.
@fasterandworse
Stephen Farrugia
Stian