Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Clankers Die on Christmas

remyhax.xyz

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 268 posts

Re: Clankers Die on Christmas

#241

Post by mrguyorama »

taneq wrote: post #176

Does anyone else find it just a little disturbing how hard a certain subset of the population is leaning into this? Like they've finally found a group of people that they're allowed to hate. And let's be clear here, they're personifying this tech. Nobody bothers to hate a word processor or a 3D printer.

Have you never seen the scene in Office Space with the rap and the baseball bat and an office printer?

Like, no, hating machinery is as old as Ludd at least. I guarantee Grug back in the cave days was trying to convince his cavemates that "weaving is an abomination and we should just carry everything with our hands"

Re: Clankers Die on Christmas

#242

Post by mrguyorama »

serf wrote: post #78
MangoToupe wrote: post #63

I must admit I’m a little unnerved with how gleefully people enjoy using a fake slur. I realize it doesn’t harm anyone but I just don’t get the appeal.

it kind of reminds me of 'mudblood' from harry potter a bit, also from pop fiction -- and similarly considered harmless. yeah it's not directly harmful -- wizards aren't real -- but it also serves as an (often first) introduction to children of the concepts of familial/genetic superiority, eugenics, and ethnic/genetic cleansing. I can't really think of any cases where setting an example of calling something a nasty n…

>'mudblood' from harry potter a bit, also from pop fiction -- and similarly considered harmless

Considered harmless? The entire point of the "mudblood" slur is so JK can clearly signal who agrees with the literal Wizard Nazis! Anyone and everyone says "muggle", but calling someone a mudblood in the harry potter universe was how literal children reading knew you were the bad guy!

Re: Clankers Die on Christmas

#244

Post by catigula »

newfocogi wrote: post #2

For others who, like me, didn't know what "clankers" are: it appears it's a popular derogatory term for robots or AI, arising from the Star Wars universe where clone troopers used the term as a derogatory term for droids.

It's also a pretty ineffective term because it's clearly somewhat endearing.

Re: Clankers Die on Christmas

#245

Post by bluefirebrand »

hiccuphippo wrote: post #197
yoyohello13 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's mostly middle/high schoolers using the term. Get with the times grandpa...

Funny because it sounds so dated. And wrong since Ai doesn't use moving parts. I think slop is the better term.

Clanker refers to the AI itself, slop is what it produces

Re: Clankers Die on Christmas

#247

Post by bbor »

totallymike wrote: post #82
bbor wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's definitely popular online, specifically on Reddit, Bluesky, Twitter, and TikTok. There's communities that have formed around their anti-AI stance[1][2][3], and after multiple organic efforts to "brainstorm slurs" for people who use AI[4], "clanker" has come out on top. This goes back at least 2 years[6] in terms of grassroots talk, and many more to the original Clone Wars usage[7]. For those who can see the obvi…

Citations eight and nine amuse me. I readily and merrily agree with the articles that deriving slurs from existing racist or homophobic slurs is a problem, and the use of these terms in fashions that mirror actual racial stereotypes (e.g. "clanka") is pretty gross. That said, I think that asking people to treat ChatGPT with "kindness and respect" is patently embarrassing. We don't ask people to be nice to their phone…

Sorry, I was unclear — that racism comment was tongue in cheek. Regardless of political leanings, I figured we can all agree that racism is bad!

I generally agree re:chatGPT in that it doesn’t have moral standing on its own, but still… it does speak. Being mean to a fork is a lot different from being mean to a chatbot, IMHO. The list of things that speak just went from 1 to 2 (humans and LLMs), so it’s natural to expect some new considerations. Specifically, the risk here is that you are what you do.

Perhaps a good metaphor would be cyberbullying. Obviously there’s still a human on the other side of that, but I do recall a real “just log off, it’s not a real problem, kids these days are so silly” sentiment pre, say, 2015.

Re: Clankers Die on Christmas

#248

Post by hudon »

amarant wrote: post #127
GeoAtreides wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it's not logical: we're not gods, only human, all too human.

But we're allegedly made in god's image. Doesn't that imply that we'd attempt to do all the things he did? Like creating a lesser life form in our image, for example. Seems logical to me

An image is a projection, it lacks at least one dimension of that which is projected
Post reply on HN