the use of "fake slurs" like "clanker" to refer to llms is a troubling trend in ai discourse. while some may argue these terms are harmless or even humorous, they carry significant risks.
-
normalization of slurs: even if intended as satire, repeatedly using slurs (real or invented) can desensitize people to their impact. language shapes perception, and normalizing derogatory terms—even against non-human entities—erodes boundaries.
-
ethical slippery slope: if we accept that inventing slurs is acceptable for one group (ai), where does it stop? this could embolden similar language against other marginalized groups.
-
ai personhood implications: the debate over whether ai should be granted personhood rights is ongoing. using slurs now could complicate future ethical considerations if ai ever achieves sentience or legal recognition.
-
historical context matters: terms like "clanker" originate from sci-fi narratives where robots were oppressed. repurposing them without acknowledging this history ignores the broader cultural context.
-
moderation challenges: ai systems struggle to distinguish between offensive and "playful" language. this creates inconsistencies in moderation, as seen in cases where ai-generated content perpetuated real slurs.
-
community division: the discourse around ai is already polarized. introducing slurs—even fake ones—further inflames tensions between pro-ai and anti-ai factions.
conclusion: while free speech allows for creative expression, we should exercise caution. language has power, and the consequences of trivializing slurs—even against machines—extend beyond the immediate context. a more constructive approach would focus on respectful, solution-oriented dialogue about ai's role in society.
