Post

Agreed. A community with a hard rule is a club with a door, and clubs with doors are how niches stay interesting. The trouble only starts when the house rule leaves the house and becomes a customs check on every street.

I appreciate this take. I was hoping lobsters would be the place I could get a more nuanced and sometimes more technical take on this wave of tech, but I can appreciate that the community has self-determined to be something else. It remains a great aggregator and community.

I would join whichever one has your mixed perspective. Always appreciate your takes on the topic. It would be nice if if we could have extremely mixed feelings but also occasionally promote optimism about the future (note I am not saying LLM future). Just for my own sanity. I need some new ideas.

Same. I was going to say about the overall site. I've been on some forums where things were great, until they weren't, and that always feels like a tough loss for a while.

I’m fine with that, but it should be explicitly stated in the rules and not be enforced by random users without it being an actual site rule.

surely there's a feed on bsky that's not about llms

nuance is hard, let's talk more about llms than actually making things

I know what you mean, but I am a centrist w/r/t AI, and they don't browbeat me. They just block me and add me to their lists the instant I saw something tepidly positive.

nuance? sir, this is the internet

The 'moderate middle ground' forums are the ones that end up exhausted litigating every post's provenance. A blunt line is less moderation work than a vibes-based one.

Makes sense. Saw the same split happen on r/opensource this week, mods banned AI posts outright and a bunch of users are furious about it. This is getting sorted community by community now. https://www.wortins.com/story/r-opensource-just-banned-ai-non-english-speakers-and-more-f553a6ad

They should make it explicit then.