this post was submitted on 31 Oct 2025
90 points (98.9% liked)

askchapo

23193 readers
218 users here now

Ask Hexbear is the place to ask and answer ~~thought-provoking~~ questions.

Rules:

  1. Posts must ask a question.

  2. If the question asked is serious, answer seriously.

  3. Questions where you want to learn more about socialism are allowed, but questions in bad faith are not.

  4. Try !feedback@hexbear.net if you're having questions about regarding moderation, site policy, the site itself, development, volunteering or the mod team.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
PorkrollPosadist@hexbear.net
replaceable@hexbear.net
VILenin@hexbear.net
SexUnderSocialism@hexbear.net
khizuo@hexbear.net
Wakmrow@hexbear.net
90
Anyone else notice that more conservative-leaning people are much more receptive to "AI"? (hexbear.net)
submitted 1 month ago by sexywheat@hexbear.net to c/askchapo@hexbear.net
54 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

As a general observation, I find that the more right-leaning a person is, the more they tend to be receptive to the usage and adoption of "AI". And inversely, the more left-leaning, the more skeptical.

I pin this on the notion that most conservatives hate workers, are happy to see them laid off, etc. Whereas more progressive folks tend to see value in what human beings do.

Moreover, communists like ourselves almost completely dismiss the plagarism slop machines as being utterly misanthropic, not to mention flying in the face of the labour theory of value.

As an anecdote, I work with a conservative guy who puts EVERYTHING through Grok. Almost everything he types/says to his team mates he gets Grok to write for him. Everything he "fact-checks" goes through Grok. He views it as totally impartial, without bias, etc.

On the other hand, I think more critically-minded folks are prone to seeing the inherent bias in these chatbot slop machines, and view them with skepticism in the same way they view all other institutions in society.

Clearly I am generalising a lot here, but has anyone else made the same or similar observation?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Carl@hexbear.net 10 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

(talking mostly about image generation here, but I think the general concept also applies to text, "facts" from ai research machines, etc)

I think it's more about a person's orientation towards art than anything else. Conservatives tend to openly hate artists, whether by way of sneering at someone who learns art in college or by openly raging against any artist who has an opinion. That's why people with actual artistic chops who are nevertheless conservative are such fascinating outliers, the average conservative's artistic capability is more on the level of Dry Bones than Ben Garrison.

So for someone with this attitude, image generation achieves everything they want from art - a surface level depiction of {thing} with nothing else attached to it - at scale, speed, and ease. It's a paradigm shift for them, while those who are more critical of art will immediately clock everything about a generated image that is uncanny, cliche, or incongruent.

All of this is correlations, of course, not ironclad laws.