I brought up an issue regarding regulation —
How do you create a law that distinguishes the difference between thr learning that humans do versus learning that AIs do.
(I don't think this is a point that should be ignored — as you could end up with a cure that is worse than the disease.)
Boris Mann ( @boris ) talking about if the community made their ATProto docs CC-NC, then Bluesky company could not contribute.
Oops — unintended consequence.
Conner Ruhl mentioning that regulations is favoring AI companies with lots of money and hurting open-source AI projects that don't have money to deal with regulations.
Conner Ruhl mentioning that ATProto user-intents is giving people a false sense of security.
Bad actor won't care about them.
If you want to be private, you need to actually make your data private!
One person pointing out that an "anti-AI intent" would prevent people from using anti-spam filters, since it is AI.
( @reiver note: I have said similar a number of times elsewhere.)
One person from Flipboard pointing out that, AI is used to look for hate-speech, and look for pornographic images, etc.
An "anti-AI" intent would block that, too.
Conner Ruhl — Bluesky's still sucks a bit in terms of onboarding, because it lacks some of the AI necessary to do that.
One person saying — builders have mostly left Mastodon (and gone to Bluesky), because when developers try to build on Mastodon, they get yelled at, and maybe even receive death threats.
