WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2026 Poal.co

461

I don't see what benefit they have.

But they create the ability to astroturf on a level that isn't tolerable.

I don't see what benefit they have. But they create the ability to astroturf on a level that isn't tolerable.

(post is archived)

[–] 3 pts

I'd support it although I'm not sure how enforceable it is.

[–] 3 pts

Make as part of the law that if bots are used, there is a tag that identifies it as a computer's artificially generated message to ID it as chat-bait (similar to putting 'advertisement' labels on the junk stories click bait that are in websites )

[–] 2 pts

Make shadow bans where the user is unaware illegal

[–] 0 pt

I agree, that should be illegal.

In a sense it already is, it's communication interception.

I agree, we need common sense text on internet laws.

Like gun laws which protect us from the ability for someone to commit murder on a level that isn't tolerable.

Maybe when there's a government in the world that isn't overrun by kikes or commies where laws matter again, that'd be a swell idea.

Nothing quite like posting a fairly flippant comment only to get a goddamn essay in response to then see the account has managed to average 50 comments a day for months on end, on fucking poal of all places.

[–] 0 pt

I think if AI posting as real people were banned, the internet would get significantly quieter. A lot of stuff you think are coming from real users are in fact just bots. People don't realize how bad it is, but if GPT-3 is that good and it's just some open source project, imagine what governments can do.

[–] 0 pt

Making it illegal for a robot intelligence to impersonate a living person sounds like a nifty idea to me.

[–] 0 pt

It would just be another law selectively enforced. We already have laws that are supposed to stop all this censorship, but the FCC isn't doing its job.

[–] 0 pt

what do you think about mudkips

[–] 0 pt

What's that?

Load more (1 reply)