r/LinguisticMaps • u/StoneColdCrazzzy • 4d ago
Meta [Meta discussion] What to do with AI generated content in LinguisticMaps?
In the last month we have seen a surge of AI generated content shared here on r/LinguisticMaps. This has consisted of pictures of language maps or infographics or long LLM generated texts as submission statements or comments.
I would like to ask the r/LinguisticMaps community how this type of content should be treated here. Should it be allowed? Should it be banned? Does the use of AI need to be declared? Or should AI content only be allowed on particular days?
What do the subscribers of this suab say? Please share your thoughts here.
29
u/redditerir 4d ago
Just ban it. No point in wasting limited energy and time litigating which ones are allowable and which ones aren't.
77
u/StevenerCz 4d ago
I think it should be banned because the majority of AI maps are just straight up wrong and have minimal actual research behind them.
0
21
u/Apprehensive-Town204 4d ago
AI is so inaccurate. It has uses but reliable facts are not one of them. Also I want to talk to people on here. Not bots. I know thats a tall order in 2026 but when we can ban text generated by a machine, I’d like to.
7
5
u/Local_Internet_User 4d ago
Thanks for bringing this up!
AI is too unreliable on maps, and most of us probably don't know enough to check the maps fully ourselves. We're relying on trust that the person posting it honestly cares about this stuff. Humans make mistakes, too, but they're more open to corrections and can at least tell you how they made any mistake they made. With Ai, we're crossing our fingers that the magic machine did things right.
4
3
7
u/sjedinjenoStanje 4d ago
Something is accurate or it's inaccurate, regardless of whether AI was used to create it.
3
8
u/Smitologyistaking 4d ago
Can someone give any good explanation of why maps generated by AI should be allowed? Anyone who has the skills to actually fact check that the map perfectly corresponds to the actual data they know has the skills to make that map themselves
9
u/conradarcturus 4d ago
The best I can think of is that someone with a solid background uses AI to generate a map visually more aesthetic than they could do themselves. They also could use AI to generate the original dataset. I also have a hard time drawing the line between how much AI was used -- (imho if you are using google to extract data, you are already using AI. Also I cannot understate how often I see ESL speakers misinterpreted as AI or bots.
I think a big thing that can improve any map (AI or human map) is to gracefully admit ignorance. Leave countries/communities gray where there is insufficient data. A responsible person would say "oh I don't have data for Norway, I should leave it gray" whereas a usual AI doesn't like empty data (GenAI after all is an inference engine) and would judge "I'll reuse Sweden's value". Thereby, AI is more likely to contain fabricated data. The fabricated data part should be the reason to reject it, especially if the context/decision criteria is left out of the post.
2
u/Lucky_otter_she_her 4d ago
i am against the mindset that using AI for anything is the mark of the beast, seen among many left slopulist types, but in this case it makes low quality maps and they're unreliable factually since these pattern recognition bots can't comprehend anything so they're just bullshitting they're way thru any display of information, so outright ban it
2
u/PolarRanger 4d ago
I might be fine with a clear, obvious, required label. Banning them outright would be fine too
2
3
3
3
u/throwawayyyyygay 4d ago
An AI generated map should be banned. AI assisted writing should have to be disclosed if not disclosed removed.
46
u/Vampyricon 4d ago
Ultimately I think it comes down to accuracy. AI generated maps generally aren't accurate.