745
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 04 Nov 2026
745 points (99.6% liked)
Fuck AI
8692 readers
2474 users here now
"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"
A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.
AI, in this case, refers to LLMs, GPT technology, and anything listed as "AI" meant to increase market valuations.
Rules:
- Relevant posts only.
- No bigotry.
- This isn't a place to talk about the cons and (supposed) pros of AI for different use cases. This is /c/fuck_ai .
- Especially no AI advocacy.
- Don't make any posts that are just AI content with no context unless the point of your post is obvious from content. (Don't just post slop advertisements or slop political cartoons. At least make your point about it clear so we know you aren't just trolling.)
- Venting is part of the purpose of this community, but don't aim frustration or accusations at other users.
- These rules are a living document that may change in the future.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I don't know a single school where the pledge is required?
Edit: and every literary novel? Sure, EVERYTHING has a perspective. Novels are written by people, of course it has perspective. Trying to argue that makes it propaganda is a little much
It hasn't been explicitly required in decades, but it's still implicitly required: everyone else is doing it, and if you don't, your teachers may treat you differently.
Okay, maybe not, like, Hatchet, but there's plenty that make a more direct and incendiary point. It's why schools consistently try to ban books like To Kill a Mockingbird or the Handmaid's Tale. School boards think those books are propaganda in defiance of their cultural values.
It is explicitly required that schools give a time for reverance and respect to the flag each day. The pledge fulfills this requirement but is not the only way.
So it basically is specifically required.
Ok, so maybe generalizations like your original ones aren't great then?
If people are trying to ban books, that sucks, but it does highlight that the problem you're trying to highlight isn't as big as you're suggesting.
It could be bad, but it isn't, because people push back.
Now Internet propaganda? Tv propaganda? Media propaganda? Oh hell yeah, that shit is bad. I wish I didn't have to try to find three different sources before I could trust a news article.
In some districts. Some of the time. Plenty of other districts uphold their book bans. But that's only talking about novels in English classes anyway. The more insidious one is the first part of what I mentioned: history textbooks.
School boards basically buy the version of a textbook that supports their values. They're not trying to buy the most accurate or unbiased; they are buying propaganda that colors history in whatever way they favor. And that is true in every school district in the country. Very few teachers have the knowledge, resources, and support to counter what is in the textbooks their district provides, so kids just get taught a narrow scope that is often extremely suspect or a politician's preferred description of events.
When McGraw-Hill makes a textbook, they're tailoring the content within because ultimately they're a company trying to make money. Schools will always be rife with propaganda as long as that is the model. If textbooks were provided by not-for-profit educational institutes and didn't need local Karens to approve of every paragraph, maybe things would be different. But right now, propaganda in schools is bad.
I don't disagree with that at all.
Literature though, not sure how you could paint the entire category as propaganda.