-9
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 30 Oct 2026
-9 points (42.6% liked)
Unpopular Opinion
9649 readers
104 users here now
Welcome to the Unpopular Opinion community!
How voting works:
Vote the opposite of the norm.
If you agree that the opinion is unpopular give it an arrow up. If it's something that's widely accepted, give it an arrow down.
Guidelines:
Tag your post, if possible (not required)
- If your post is a "General" unpopular opinion, start the subject with [GENERAL].
- If it is a Lemmy-specific unpopular opinion, start it with [LEMMY].
Rules:
1. NO POLITICS
Politics is everywhere. Let's make this about [general] and [lemmy] - specific topics, and keep politics out of it.
2. Be civil.
Disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally attack others. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Please also refrain from gatekeeping others' opinions.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Shitposts and memes are allowed but...
Only until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.
5. No trolling.
This shouldn't need an explanation. If your post or comment is made just to get a rise with no real value, it will be removed. You do this too often, you will get a vacation to touch grass, away from this community for 1 or more days. Repeat offenses will result in a perma-ban.
6. Defend your opinion
This is a bit of a mix of rules 4 and 5 to help foster higher quality posts. You are expected to defend your unpopular opinion in the post body. We don't expect a whole manifesto (please, no manifestos), but you should at least provide some details as to why you hold the position you do.
Instance-wide rules always apply. https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Using words like "prejudice" and "discriminate" implies a moral dimension that I don't think applies here. There's nothing inherently immoral about disapproving of AI use or not wanting to unwittingly consume AI-generated content.
I mean by definition it's a moral stance. Morals literally by definition just mean the belief of what is right or wrong.
It's basically impossible for any stance to not be a moral one on nearly everything. Prejudice and discrimination are entirely the correct words here.
The problem is the way people typically use these words makes it feel wrong to use them in this context in this fashion.
So despite them being technically correct. They feel wrong.
I'm not saying the user isn't making a moral judgement, I'm saying the OP is implying a moral parallel to racism and bigotry that simply doesn't exist here.
Thank you. They seem the right words to me, too, but I'm always open to alternatives in using the right words as I make a sincere effort to be exact in my vernacular.
They're accurate by dictionary definition. Care to make alternative suggestions so I can improve the accuracy of my analogies?
My critique of your position is that you are intentionally using these words to imply immorality where there is none, not that you are using the words incorrectly.
In other words, I believe you're trying to say that boycotting or calling out AI use is immoral in the same way that racism is immoral. If that's not what you are trying to say, then I would suggest using different words.
I do believe it is an issue of morality, though. At least so far as people judging others for using AI. It's no different from judging someone based on their haircut, their tattoos, or the clothes they're wearing. All of these are choices.
There's nothing immoral about judging someone by their choices, though. Whether it's the clothes they wear or the tools they use. In fact, I would argue that their personal choices are the most morally defensible basis from which to form an opinion about someone.
So would it not be accurate to say you're discriminating against people based on their clothes/facial hair/tattoos/etc? Or in other words, you're prejudiced against people with a beard/wearing a tie dye shirt/sporting a skull tattoo on their face? Those all seem like accurate words and statements to me.
This is just adding a new discrimination/prejudice to the list. Discriminating against a developer based on their choice to use AI. Prejudiced against people who utilize LLMs. It's just as much based on an individuals morals as they relate to the other person's judgment. Unless I'm missing something?
The issue I'm pointing to isn't that you're misusing the words technically, but that you seem to be using them to draw a parallel to unfair discrimination and prejudice, such as in racism.
The strict definition of a word can vary from its connotation in context, and a well-communicated idea accounts for both. If it was never your intention to draw a parallel to racism or other forms of bigotry then your opinion as presented is less "unpopular" and more "badly communicated".
But 'fair' is entirely subjective. Moreso than almost any other term. What you think is fair isn't what I think is fair, and vice versa.
I try not to discriminate against anyone, as I aspire to be an egalitarian, but if society is gung ho on discriminating then let's go all the way. People who hate AI can discriminate against those who celebrate it, and people who hate Apple can discriminate against their customers. That seems fair to me. Does it to you?
I see zero problem with this, at least from a moral or ethical point of view, and except perhaps describing it as "hate". This is another choice of words that seems to draw a parallel to racism and other forms of bigotry.
You must not have seen the /c/fuckai community yet 😂