Is #mastodon becoming an echo chamber? This post from @carnage4life has me questioning our community. The Mastodon team is finally getting some traction, the product improvements are increasing, The #UX is improving, yet people posting on multiple platforms are making comments like this. It's confusing.

I *know* people here don't want this to be a classic social media-clone but we'd *like* journalists to be here right? They aren't coming with examples like this!

As this conversation is spiraling a bit I want to make a few things clear:
1. I'd like Mastodon to be MORE inclusive and bring in more voices
2. Some people don't seem to want that
3. This is core problem to solve: How do we let more in, but not "pollute" your feed?
4. The solution is NOT "gatekeeping", revelling in the fact that AI journalists aren't welcome
5. This is the same reason we lost "Black Twitter" when it came over in 2022

Yes, a lot of you don't want AI posts in your feed (or pick any other topic) but the solution isn't to keep "AI People" from joining Mastodon, any more than it is keeping marginalized communities off of Mastodon.

@scottjenson I’m not interested in following any “AI people”. That doesn’t make it an echo chamber. We don’t need equal amounts of people who love puppies and want to kill puppies, not everything needs to be equally represented.

@Gargron That is a personal choice and one which I totally respect. But I do think Mastodon should be big enough, and open enough, to allow an "AI community" to form, even thrive.

Too many people in my replies don't seem to agree with that.

@scottjenson @Gargron I'd have to ask, what value would an an AI Booster community bring to the FediVerse?

@cratermoon @scottjenson @Gargron This is a very rich ethics question hidden in a specific example.

Would you permit or allow any community with which you disagree to participate on a platform, even if you’re not forced to participate?

A shortlist of thought experiments, to broaden the perspective, some of which are already here, some not…
- The oil & gas community
- Forestry workers (logging)
- The cryptocurrency community
- Workers at a chick rendering plant
- The finance industry
- Adult content creators
- Religious communities

Is there a litmus test for topics that you can or can’t discuss on the fediverse? Specific servers sure, but the whole fediverse?

Does that align with the values put forth by mastodon or the fediverse in general?

I don’t have the answers.

@trisweb @cratermoon @scottjenson @Gargron by definition, no. Literally anyone can spin up a server and talk about anything/try to get more folk to listen…

But other folk have to want to listen to whatever they are saying. Servers and individuals can just decide not to. No one is guaranteed an audience, just the ability to speak.

@octothorpe @trisweb @cratermoon @scottjenson @Gargron This. The fake question framed as if not pandering to their "AI" fawning bullshit is "not allowing them to be on fedi" is bad-faith sealioning. If they don't come here because they know folks here don't want to listen to their shit, that's not our problem.
@dalias @octothorpe @trisweb @cratermoon @scottjenson @Gargron Yeah, I don't know what Fedi everyone else has been hanging out on, but there seem to be plenty of "AI" believers on here. I used to follow quite a number of them prior to their going off the LLM deep end. I have to maintain an extensive filter list to avoid having that stuff constantly surface in my feed.
This whole thing is just another variant of the tired old "free speech means you have to listen to my crap" argument.

@pmdj @dalias

That is the exact opposite of what I said. I'm saying the fediverse gives you the tools to follow/block/filter/ to your hearts content to create the space you want.

What is corrosive is people ACTIVELY going after people they don't agree with. Just look at the replies to my post to get small sample.

My point was, I thought, very simple, and very reasonable: we should be more welcoming of more opinions. If you don't like them, then don't follow them. That should be the fedi-way. To be clear, I'm NOT endorsing AI, it just used it as an example.

Instead I'm living the very point I was trying to make. I've been told to leave, called a racist, and had ad hominem attacks leveled at me.

Now to be fair, my original post was poorly worded. I've owned that
https://social.coop/@scottjenson/116358195717244835

@scottjenson @pmdj @dalias I'm with ya bro. Don't hear anyone complaining about ai application in the science fields. People are just focused on the slop side of things, not the tangible.

[edit]
Came back to posit a real world example.

Simulating ALL 100 billion stars in the Milky Way for the first time (with the help of AI?!
- Dr Becky
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFpW5W06kV4

Simulating ALL 100 billion stars in the Milky Way for the first time (with the help of AI?!)

YouTube
@De_Minimis @scottjenson @pmdj I'm not going to click on the clickbait, but the claim is obviously not plausible and either she means something else and the title is just clickbait, or she's drunk the koolaid.
@dalias @scottjenson @pmdj She's an Astrophysicist and you're an idiot.
@De_Minimis @scottjenson @pmdj You cannot *simulate* any of that. I do not need to be an astrophysicists to know that.
@De_Minimis @scottjenson @pmdj @dalias > Don't hear anyone complaining about ai application in the science fields. People are just focused on the slop side of things, not the tangible.

You haven't seen the reports about medical errors and the whitepapers about failing reliability & deskilling of professionals?

From the sound of it the video you're liking is a major case of the latter.
@lispi314 @dalias @pmdj @scottjenson Who are you exactly and defend why I should care? What makes you relevant?
@De_Minimis @dalias @pmdj @scottjenson I could reply the same. In fact, I do.
@lispi314 @dalias @pmdj @scottjenson I miss the days where children where seen and not heard.
@De_Minimis @dalias @pmdj @scottjenson Wow, that tells me quite a lot more about your grasp of ethics and personhood than I think you intended.

More importantly, resorting to ad hominem is ignoring the point of my post and doesn't deserve a reply not making fun of it.
@lispi314 @dalias @pmdj @scottjenson You're too young to be a psychologist. Go clean your room, kid.
@De_Minimis @dalias @pmdj @scottjenson I'm glad to know I come off as young at heart.

The rot of my flesh argues otherwise, sadly.

"seen not heard" is something that was said of women and slaves in the past, did you know? That's the kind of culture you're perpetuating unquestioningly.
@lispi314 @dalias @pmdj @scottjenson What is your objective here?
@De_Minimis @dalias @pmdj @scottjenson For now, it was to try and make you rethink this interaction in the future. I gave up on any notion of a more productive conversation.
@lispi314 @dalias @pmdj @scottjenson *Slow clap*
Finished cleaning your room child?
Buh-bye-la.