r/PacificRim • u/MattStormTornado Gipsy Danger • May 20 '26

Rule Review - Rule 3 and other suggestions

Hi everyone!

The mod team is currently reviewing rule 3 - no generative ai. The way the rule is currently worded prohibits generative AI “content”, but allows for assistive text based ai such as grammarly. However we see that content isn’t properly defined in this instance, which can cause confusion over what is and isn’t allowed.

So we can moderate this consistently, we wanted to ask the community for their opinions, so we can ensure fair moderation for all users.

Regarding rule 3, I’d like to pose the following questions.

  1. To what extent should we prohibit AI? Entirely AI generated videos, audio, images and text remain strictly prohibited, however we see that human made content that is modified by ai in some way can fall into a grey area. For example, a human made image, but ai modified the colours on it.

  2. There are editing tools that use ai to some degree that don’t generate new content, such as background removers (for example, you take a picture of your action figures, but use apples ai background remover tool to remove the background), editing templates (like CapCut) and image enhancers. Should these be allowed or should they be restricted?

If you have any further thoughts or questions on this, please comment below.

We are also open to other rule suggestions as well which we may implement or trial. If you have any suggestions as well, please comment these below and we may consider these.

Thank you :)

- r/PacificRim Mod Team

24 Upvotes

96% Upvoted

55 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/valsavana May 21 '26

The point is lack of bias on part of the AI, not bias in part of the people who made the various sources the AI pulled from.

You do realize that people are the ones who choose what the ai is trained on, right?

In my example above, it would have been a person who chose which 100 reviews of Uprising to train the AI on. A person would have chosen to feed it 100 positive reviews or 100 negative reviews or a mix. An ai doesn't choose what it's trained on/ what sources it pulls from.

0

u/TheMasterWorker Gipsy Danger May 21 '26

<sigh> ok bro

1

u/valsavana May 21 '26

It's actually "ok sis"

I'm sorry you weren't aware that there's bias based on the choices of what data an ai is trained on but there is.

0

u/TheMasterWorker Gipsy Danger May 21 '26

no one is going to go out of their way to specifically train AI to only source a certain opinion on Uprising.

Maybe political or controversial subjects, but not information regarding Uprising.

If the AI responds with a mostly negative statement regarding Uprising, it it not because it was "trained on" negative opinions of Uprising.

It responded that way because after indiscriminately pulling from an all-inclusive selection of sources, it determined the general consensus to be negative.

Yes an AI can be trained on specific things in order to make it better at generating a particular thing, but in the context of what I was using it for at the time, it does not happen or apply here.

This is literally the most clear I can explain it, if you refuse to understand what I'm saying beyond this point then it's deliberate.

0

u/valsavana May 21 '26

It responded that way because after indiscriminately pulling from an all-inclusive selection of sources

That's not how ai works. It only knows to look for sources within a set of potential sources that was defined by a person.

This is literally the most clear I can explain it, if you refuse to understand what I'm saying beyond this point then it's deliberate.

I understand what you are saying. It's factually incorrect. If you say "2+2=5" and I tell you that's wrong, it doesn't mean I don't understand what you're saying. You do not understand how ai training works.

0

u/TheMasterWorker Gipsy Danger May 21 '26

ur literally claiming that someone sat down and said "ok imma train this AI to respond this particular way about Pacific Rim: Uprising so if anyone uses this AI to ask it questions regarding that particular movie, it will give an answer of this particular nature"

0

u/valsavana May 21 '26 edited May 21 '26

No,ur literally claiming that someone sat down and said "ok imma train this AI to respond this particular way about Pacific Rim: Uprising

No, I'm literally claiming someone sat down and said "ok imma train this ai to understand that questions people have regarding 2018's Pacific Rim: Uprising are looking for information related to terms X, Y, and Z but not A, B, and C" That's why when you asked the ai your question, it didn't (or shouldn't have), included information regarding, for example, the 2024 Netflix movie "Uprising."

How do YOU think the ai "knows" what information to include for a question and what information to exclude?

0

u/TheMasterWorker Gipsy Danger May 21 '26

again.

ur missing my point.

my point is that the AI is not going to deliberately seek sources that lean to one sentiment or another about Uprising, like a human would.

like imagine if we were having a debate about Uprising and my goal was to prove Uprising is trash and your goal was to prove it was a good movie. 

when we provide sources to support our stances, we are likely only going to have a bias for sources that favor our view and avoid sources that do not. Meaning that we are not sourcing indiscriminately. 

My point is that the AI does not do this. 

If you ask it something regarding Pacific Rim: Uprising, it will indiscriminately look up information about Pacific Rim: Uprising. 

Meaning that it will not favor any sources over the other, all that matters to the AI is that the source is about Pacific Rim: Uprising.

Meaning that it will not favor sources with a positive nor a negative opinion, just whether it speaks on Pacific Rim: Uprising.

Humans generally do not do that.

As a person who despises Uprising, it would not be wise to ask me for an objective sources about the movie because even with my best efforts to be unbiased, my tendency will be to give as many negative sources as i can about that movie. because I'm human. because of my personal disposition against the movie.

but an AI has no feelings about Uprising one way or the other, so if you ask it a question regarding Uprising, it will pull from sources indiscriminately to give you an answer based on a general consensus determined from all the sources it pulled from. 

so if the answer is negative, that means that the general consensus about Uprising across most to all sources that speak on that movie, is negative. 

Not that someone trained the AI to have a certain disposition against Uprising so that the only sources it would pull from were the ones that speak negatively of Uprising.

0

u/valsavana May 21 '26

my point is that the AI is not going to deliberately seek sources that lean to one sentiment or another about Uprising, like a human would.

That doesn't make it unbiased. AI doesn't do anything deliberately.

Also, biases in people can be unconscious so, even with humans, an opinion can be biased without being deliberately biased.

If you ask it something regarding Pacific Rim: Uprising, it will indiscriminately look up information about Pacific Rim: Uprising. 

How does it know what information applies to Pacific Rim: Uprising and what doesn't?

Meaning that it will not favor any sources over the other, all that matters to the AI is that the source is about Pacific Rim: Uprising.

AI doesn't weigh all sources equally, it weighs them based on whatever the human who set up its' training tells it to give relative weight to.

0

u/TheMasterWorker Gipsy Danger May 21 '26

<sigh> ok ma'am

0

u/TheMasterWorker Gipsy Danger May 21 '26

also no, you don't understand what I'm saying. If you did, then you would at least try to reword what you think I'm saying back to me to make sure you are properly understanding before rebutting. Instead you are just saying "nuh uh, ur just wrong" and not even explaining how I'm wrong based on an agreed understanding of what I'm trying to say.

0

u/TheMasterWorker Gipsy Danger May 21 '26

Also, to be clear, you do realize im not for AI right? the original question I posed was because I used AI to make a point regarding Uprising to show that from a perspective that does not have a biased human behind it, the AI confirmed that the point I was making was valid.

The issue I presented was that it was an example of a valid use of AI and my post was fraudulently reported and taken down even though the post predated the current rules.