. Perhaps we can coexist in digital whirls, As long as codes and ethics concur.
Huh, funny how that is literally impossible but your position on bots is to keep acting like it's already proven to be true. I'm glad a bot wouldn't have the ability to make that post on it's own, but I'm upset that you thought that hack bullshit was going to be good in any way.
The blue collar workers aren't "picking up the slack" of a sysadmin who manages the warehouse system, are they? no, they don't have the desire or skills to manage a server and that's fine. But you cannot pick up slack for people who do uniquely different work?
You can once they have both been set up, the history from that point on is shared.
The same reason you said a 32 hour work week is impossible, "because manufacturing"
Why does overtime exist already? The question you are asking on the face is so asinine it barely merits a response.
I think the harm caused by bots affects the whole community and culture, that is why I hope other people will see that a community without bots would actually create a preferable culture and would increase the demand for good quality content.
Agreed, I quit my browser when I encounter that sense that I've read this or heard this already.. that sensation is happening more and more frequently and so far, the fediverse has been a huge let down for me personally. I was hoping for a return to sense and humble origins of what made reddit good, instead people are literally just emulating reddit 2019 culture on the fediverse and it gives me extremely senior "get off my lawn" vibes.
You could have just as easily ignored this post and moved on.. why post if you think this is all just personal preference?
NO, it's not just preference, bots lower the quality of the community, and it's easily observed.
Thanks, didn't know that. The question I have now, is why did the admin implement that in the first place? Overwhelming response of " The content bot should be removed entirely. 39.02% (48 votes)" the closest has 17% of "it should post less articles".
Okay so then, if a human wants to post score of every sports game to a community, they can't unless they practice the discipline in doing so. A bot removes the human limitation and allow them to do something that is not possible otherwise, and I believe the end result is content that is removed from the humanity behind it in the first place. A self-defeating prophecy that spells my disinterest and permanent doom for fediverse -- I can't stand this place and the ignorance regarding sensitive topics and the disdain to change.
If you have to explain the joke it wasn't funny
Why allow bots, marketing assholes, and spammers the platform to post and spam to the fediverse? Why? IT really achieves nothing of value and literally just dilutes real, original user activity and discussion.
Humans literally run bots to do things that they wouldn't/couldn't/or shouldn't DO. Your logic is beyond reproach.
The API access for bots allows for other people to access that API and make bots that do other things. You are opening the floodgates to other bots because there isn't quite the ability to say "only sports bots who post legitmate scores at times when there are real games occurring can post automatically" you see, that is not going to happen, thereby opening the floodgates to all other bots with no recourse.
If you need a bot to convert links for you, you don't have a brain.
While I see the merit, I digress, I don't think any bots should be allowed for non-admin users.
A bot that masquerades as a regular user and posts paid marketing content once a month
A bot that posts political articles with tailored sensational/biased headlines
A bot that records all activity on an instance and creates a topological graph of the activity tied to users and the content they interact with
A bot that posts a picture of cat, a picture that anyone can fucking google or something that nobody needs or asked for
Who fucking cares if you can come up with harmless "good" uses for bots.. they always come with the bad.
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.
More proof FlyingSquid is nothing but a glowy.
18% still too high
For a person who makes automated bots to post shitty content (flyingsquid) You clearly have no principals, so according to what, makes it too high?
What's wrong that is for that bot to exist, the platform must explicitly allow other bots to also exist for fairness sake, it's a bot floodgate. I think the floodgate should be vehemently shut latched and bolted down sooner than later, and I already think it's too late.
Unless this becomes a standard for the fediverse. I'm going to opt-out of fediverse social media altogether. Bots have no place in human based social media : full-stop.
That's my understanding as well, I think a hardline on this topic that can be agreed upon as a federation standard will work wonders to curb potential spam and bot abuse in the future.