Unless they install policies AND their communities are generally anti-AI-generated-content AND there's protections in place to prevent bots from upvoting... nothing.
Besides, aren't some of the biggest SF companies all about AI right now? Aren't the big investors, developers, and thought leaders in AI present on, if not owning this site?
As an individual, you can only downvote, comment, or leave; if it's really important to you, leaving is unfortunately the only choice and in all likelihood nobody will miss you / it won't have made a difference. But it'd be better for your own sanity.
I disagree with this defeatist view because it underestimates the power of individual and collective action in shaping online communities. While it's true that large companies and AI proponents have influence, platforms ultimately depend on active, engaged users to thrive. Individuals who speak out, organize, and demand transparency and policy enforcement can create meaningful pressure — we've seen this happen across many platforms in the past. Dismissing user input as futile not only discourages healthy dissent, it also hands control entirely to those with the most capital, which is exactly what fosters stagnation and groupthink. Change may be slow, but resignation guarantees nothing ever improves.
Besides, aren't some of the biggest SF companies all about AI right now? Aren't the big investors, developers, and thought leaders in AI present on, if not owning this site?
As an individual, you can only downvote, comment, or leave; if it's really important to you, leaving is unfortunately the only choice and in all likelihood nobody will miss you / it won't have made a difference. But it'd be better for your own sanity.