this post was submitted on 18 Mar 2026
-29 points (31.6% liked)

No Stupid Questions

47213 readers
1844 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I get some of the surface level reasons, and those annoy me too. Cramming AI into everything is dumb and unnecessary.

However, I do feel that at a deeper level, it has a lot of useful applications that will absolutely change society and improve the efficiency and skills of those who use it. For example, if someone wants to learn to code, they could take a few different paths. There are the traditional paths, just read or go to school and learn to code that way. Or you could pay for a bootcamp or an online coding education platform. Or, you could just tell an AI chatbot you want to learn to code, and have them become your teacher, and correct any errors you make in real time. Another application is in generating ideas or quick mock ups. Say I'm playing a game of d&d with friends. I need a character avatar so I just provide a description to the AI and it makes it up quick. It might take a few prompts, but it usually does a pretty good job. Or if I have a scenario I need to make a few enemies for, I could just provide the description of those enemies and have a quick stat block made up for them.

I realize that there are underlying issues with regard to training the AI on others work, but as someone who is a musician myself, and a supporter of open source as often as possible, I feel that it's a bit hypocritical for people to get upset about AI "stealing" work with regard to code or other stuff that people willingly put out there for free for others to consume. Any artist or coder could "steal" the work of others for inspiration for their work, the same as an AI does, an AI is just much more efficient about it. I do think that most of the corporations that are pushing some new AI feature or promising the world or end of the labor force is full of shit, and that we are definitely in some sort of an AI bubble, but the technology itself is definitely useful in a lot of ways, and if it can be developed on a more localized and decentralized scale (community owned AI hubs anyone?), it could actually be a really powerful and beneficial technology for organizations and individuals looking to do more with less.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Typhoon@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 day ago (6 children)

This thread is full of "in depth reasons" but you dismissed them all and demand better ones.

[–] rabiezaater@piefed.social -2 points 1 day ago (5 children)

In depth is one thing. Logically sound and valid are another.

[–] Typhoon@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 day ago (4 children)

you dismissed them all

There you go again.

Your title and post sound like you're trying to understand. You're not here to understand. You're here to argue.

[–] rabiezaater@piefed.social 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

My intent was to try to understand why people feel the way they feel. If I disagree with a reason someone has, am I just supposed to be like "oh, ok", and move on? Is that the proper protocol here if I am supposed to be understanding? Am I not supposed to give any rebuttal to any points whatsoever and just read through the thread without replying? Is that what you would consider a true "understanding" approach?

[–] knightly@pawb.social 1 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago) (1 children)

My intent was to try to understand why people feel the way they feel. If I disagree with a reason someone has, am I just supposed to be like "oh, ok", and move on?

Make up your mind, is your point to understand why people feel the way they feel or to convince them to feel in a way you agree with?

Am I not supposed to give any rebuttal to any points whatsoever

Rebuttals are for arguments, not for understanding.

If you can't look at things from their perspective then you should be asking questions, not trying to convince them that their perspective is wrong.

[–] rabiezaater@piefed.social 1 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

I'm am no longer engaging with posts that have chosen to change the subject to tone policing. Feel free to actually respond to the topic at hand, but I am not responding to anyone outside of that, such as whether or not I'm discussing the topic appropriately or not.

[–] knightly@pawb.social 1 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago)

So, either you're accusing me of tone policing and engaging with me anyway, or you're not accusing me of tone policing yet continue to meander off topic anyway. XD

To be frank, I don't care about your tone, I'm concerned with the disconnect between what you say the topic is (why people feel a certain way) and how you're choosing to engage (insisting on another perspective instead).

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)