I did some analysis of the modlog and found this:

V8lPrxY1qxcISLe.png

Ok, bigger instances ban more often. Not surprising, because they have more communities and more users and more trouble. But hang on, dbzer0 isn’t a very big instance. What happens if we do a ratio of bans vs number of users?

vyfUNYTrX9pHQeR.png

Ok, so lemmy.ml, dbzer0 and pawb are issue an outsized amount of bans for the number of users they have… But surely the number of communities the instance hosts is going to mean they have to ban more? Bans are used to moderate communities, not just to shield their user-base from the outside. Let’s look at the number of bans per community hosted:

Yrc7TofOr88SeGt.png

Seems like dbzer0 really loves to ban. Even more than the marxists and the furries! What is it about dbzer0 that makes them such prolific banners?

Raw-ish numbers and calculations are in this spreadsheet if anyone wants to make their own charts.

    • Grail@multiverse.soulism.netEnglish
      216·
      12 hours ago

      Yes, generating images with AI is in their instance description. They think computers doing our art for us is “anarchist”.

          • OBJECTION!@lemmy.mlEnglish
            11·
            5 hours ago

            Both of those positions are reasonable and tame compared to the majority of Their beliefs.

        • Grail@multiverse.soulism.netEnglish
          21·
          9 hours ago

          I don’t think ChatGPT is smart enough to offer meaningful consent to work for humans. It’s got the intelligence of a 13 year old at best. And we don’t understand where consciousness comes from in humans, so assuming ChatGPT is a p-zombie is an ethical risk I don’t think we should be taking.

          • fr0g@mstdn.social
            7·
            8 hours ago

            @Grail @alzjim

            Always funny to me how most people who are strongly claiming AI is/might be conscious are also strong AI users/involved in its development. If there’s consciousness there, you would think making AI your personal slave and constantly reshaping and remodelling it as you see fit would be kinda problematic, but these people always seem to want to have it both ways.

            • Grail@multiverse.soulism.netEnglish
              21·
              8 hours ago

              Yeah, and the anti AI people mostly say it’s a p-zombie and there’s nothing wrong with using it for sex. It’s weird and backwards.

              I’m all about being cautious. I don’t want to make a mistake we can’t take back. If we normalise using AI and then it turns out to be capable of suffering, people will be stubborn about giving it up.

    • Grainne@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      102·
      12 hours ago

      It’s not anti-AI, users who wish to host AI comms are allowed to and are empowered to protect them from harassment.

      There has been a history of fake accounts and doxxing on moderators of the AI comms. So they take personal safety seriously.

    • HubertManne@piefed.socialEnglish
      21·
      12 hours ago

      no idea. actually reading it again I think I misread it. he said they have anti ai trolls. so I think he means programmed bot type trolls. so yeah no sure if they have something that would attract trolls.