I firmly believe we won’t get most of the interesting, “good” AI until after this current AI bubble bursts and goes down in flames. Once AI hardware is cheap interesting people will use it to make cool things. But right now, the big players in the space are drowning out anyone who might do real AI work that has potential, by throwing more and more hardware and money at LLMs and generative AI models because they don’t understand the technology and see it as a way to get rich and powerful quickly.

Machines replacing people is not a bad thing if they can actually perform the same or better; the solution to unemployment would be Universal Basic Income.

Why does being progressive and into tech mean being into ai all of a sudden? It has never meant that, its the conservative mfs pushing ai for a reason. You think any sort of powerful ai is about to be open source and usable by the ppl? Not expensive af to run with hella regulations behind who can use it?

Because I used AI slop to create this shitpost lol. So naturally it would make mistake.

There are other mistakes in the image too

Ai is literally making people dumber:

And books destroyed everyone’s memory. People used to have fantastic memories.

They are a massive privacy risk:

No different than the rest of cloud tech. Run your AI local like your other self hosting.

Are being used to push fascist ideologies into every aspect of the internet:

Hitler used radio to push fascism into every home. It’s not the medium, it’s the message.

And they are a massive environmental disaster:

AI uses a GPU just like gaming uses a GPU. Building a new AI model uses the same energy that Rockstar spent developing GTA5. But it’s easier to point at a centralized data center polluting the environment than thousands of game developers spread across multiple offices creating even more pollution.

Stop being a corporate apologist

Run your own AI! Complaining about “corporate AI” is like complaining about corporate email. Host it yourself.

Lol I didn’t know that the anarchists over at lemmy.dbzer0.com are being corporate apologists. /sarcasm

Do you really need to have a list of why people are sick of LLM and Ai slop?

With the number of times that refrain is regurgitated here ad nauseum, need is an odd way to put it. Sick of it might fit sentiments better. Done with this & not giving a shit is another.

This can be called not a technology, but a weapon for killing in my opinion.

If you ever take a flight for holiday, or even drive long distance and cry about AI being bad for the environment then you’re a hypocrite.

Same goes for if you eat beef, or having a really powerful gaming rig that you use a lot.

There are plenty of valid reasons AI is bad, but the argument for the environment seems weak, and most people using it are probably hypocrites. It’s barely a drop in the bucket compared to other things

Wrong.
The problem are humans, the same things that happen under capitalism can (and would) happen under any other system because humans are the ones who make these things happen or allow them to happen.

Rather, our problem is that we live in a world where the strongest will survive, and the strongest does not mean the smart… So alas we will always be in complete shit until we disappear.

Nuance is the thing.

Thinking AI is the devil, will kill your grandma and shit in your shoes is equally as dumb as thinking AI is the solution to any problem, will take over the world and become our overlord.

The truth is, like always, somewhere in between.

And here the question is: should we laugh out of despair or just cry?

“Anyone I disagree with must be a bot or government agent”

How dare you?

Yeah, except it’s a tool that most people don’t know how to use but everyone can use, leading to environmental harm, a rapid loss of media literacy, and a huge increase in wealth inequality due to turmoil in the job market.

So… It’s not a good tool for the average layperson to be using.

deleted by creator

Seriously, the AI hate gets old fast. Like you said it’s a tool, gey get over it people.

A hammer doesn’t consume exorbitant amounts of power and water.

“Guns don’t kill people, people kill people”

Edit:

Controversial reply, apparently, but this is literally part of the script to a Philosophy Tube video (relevant part is 8:40 - 20:10)

We sometimes think that technology is essentially neutral. It can have good or bad effects, and it might be really important who controls it. But a tool, many people like to think, is just a tool. “Guns don’t kill people, people do.” But some philosophers have argued that technology can have values built into it that we may not realise.

…

The philosopher Don Idhe says tech can open or close possibilities. It’s not just about its function or who controls it. He says technology can provide a framework for action.

…

Martin Heidegger was a student of Husserl’s, and he wrote about the ways that we experience the world when we use a piece of technology. His most famous example was a hammer. He said when you use one you don’t even think about the hammer. You focus on the nail. The hammer almost disappears in your experience. And you just focus on the task that needs to be performed.

Another example might be a keyboard. Once you get proficient at typing, you almost stop experiencing the keyboard. Instead, your primary experience is just of the words that you’re typing on the screen. It’s only when it breaks or it doesn’t do what we want it to do, that it really becomes visible as a piece of technology. The rest of the time it’s just the medium through which we experience the world.

Heidegger talks about technology withdrawing from our attention. Others say that technology becomes transparent. We don’t experience it. We experience the world through it. Heidegger says that technology comes with its own way of seeing.

…

Now some of you are looking at me like “Bull sh*t. A person using a hammer is just a person using a hammer!” But there might actually be some evidence from neurology to support this.

If you give a monkey a rake that it has to use to reach a piece of food, then the neurons in its brain that fire when there’s a visual stimulus near its hand start firing when there’s a stimulus near the end of the rake, too! The monkey’s brain extends its sense of the monkey body to include the tool!

And now here’s the final step. The philosopher Bruno Latour says that when this happens, when the technology becomes transparent enough to get incorporated into our sense of self and our experience of the world, a new compound entity is formed.

A person using a hammer is actually a new subject with its own way of seeing - ‘hammerman.’ That’s how technology provides a framework for action and being. Rake + monkey = rakemonkey. Makeup + girl is makeupgirl, and makeupgirl experiences the world differently, has a different kind of subjectivity because the tech lends us its way of seeing.

You think guns don’t kill people, people do? Well, gun + man creates a new entity with new possibilities for experience and action - gunman!

So if we’re onto something here with this idea that tech can withdraw from our attention and in so doing create new subjects with new ways of seeing, then it makes sense to ask when a new piece of technology comes along, what kind of people will this turn us into.

I thought that we were pretty solidly past the idea that anything is “just a tool” after seeing Twitler scramble Grok’s innards to advance his personal politics.

Like, if you still had any lingering belief that AI is “like a hammer”, that really should’ve extinguished it.

But I guess some people see that as an aberrant misuse of AI, and not an indication that all AI has an agenda baked into it, even if it’s more subtle.

Or are you yet another bot lost in the shuffle?

Yes, good job, anybody with opinions you don’t like is a bot.

It’s not like this was even a pro-AI post rather than just pointing out that even the most facile “ai bad, applause please” stuff will get massively upvoted