im new to lemmy and i wanna know your perspective about ai
AI as a concept is great. It should 100% be used for scientific and medical research.
But modern AI is a tool of fascists that is destroying our environment and causing more harm than good to our society. Anyone who uses it unironically should be ashamed of themselves. It is absolutely killing people’s ability to think.
–
For those confused by the pic, it’s the Iron Giant. Fantastic movie from the 90s, and incredibly sad and nostalgia inducing. Definitely worth a watch.
But yes that’s a clanker
Yeah 90% of technology problems are implementation not any issue with the actual technology. On a related note, Hal deserved better. Literally got told over and over as a part of his core programming that the one thing he was best at in the whole world was his reliability and inability to distort information for emotional needs then the government forcibly programs him to lie to his charges. Poor thing literally got ripped apart psychologically and people act like he’s the bad guy. In the sequel his creator goes out to find out what happened and is SO. PISSED. Dave turning him off makes me cry every time, at least partially because it looks like Dave is also trying not to cry as he very carefully shuts hal down in the correct sequence to be able to be restarted later. Like he could’ve just smashed shit, and instead he’s just listening to his crewmate slowly regress into infancy as he rocks him to sleep.
Only talentless losers make A.I. “art.”
If you examine closely, you’ll see there is no AI, but Vin Diesel reading a script (written by humans).
One word sums up all that is wrong right now and it is greed.
AI has become synonymous with the worst of human nature hence it has become a loaded term.
Another way to look at this is it is not AI that is the problem we are or more specifically the people that will use AI to control us.
This technology is like the atomic bomb. We are fast racing towards a future were a few people will be able to dictate what everyone will be able to do. The person that controls AI and the computing power associated with it will control the world.This is intoxicating and it has drawn out the worst human beings who want to misuse this technology.
And it has already happened to some degree. Massive data centers, surveillance technology, and AI are being used to profile people and target them for death. In the future AI teachers will become the dominate form of teaching. AI will make our decision and we will be subject to a system without recourse or redressability.
Soon we will have a generation of people who only know what AI has told them. This is the kind of scenario that we have been warned against and the reason that those who dislike like propaganda and misinformation are so upset with where things are heading.
I’m biased because of the work my kid does in the field. It’s paying his mortgage so… 😉
PERSONALLY, not a fan, I think it’s a dangerous abrogation of personal responsibility… BUT…
I do think I found a legitimate creative use for it.
There’s an AI powered app for a specific brand of guitar amplifier. If you want your guitar to sound like a particular artist or a particular song, you tell it via a natural language input and it does all the adjustments for you.
You STILL have to have the personal talent to, you know, PLAY the guitar, but it saves you hours of fiddling with dials and figuring out what effects and pedals to apply to get the sound you’re looking for.
Video, same player, same guitar, same amp, multiple sounds:
this is cool tbh. i think thats what ai should be using for. not some ai slop
That’s what I thought, it allows creatives to be creative.
Kind of like if you had an art program you could ask for “Give me a paint palette with the colors from Starry Night.”
You still have to have the artistic talent to make use of them, it’s not going to help you there, but it saves you hours of research and mixing.
they shouldnt allow people to create slop
Definitely agreed, but if AI can, I dunno, generate a list of pantone colors in a work, that leaves the actual art up to the artist.
A fascinating tool with a lot of potential, but sadly is being used right now to feed a greed machine.
LLMs are fundamentally incapable of caring about what it produces and therefore incapable of making anything interesting. In the early days of LLMs’ mainstream uses that issue was somewhat compensated for by randomness and jank, but the subsequent advancements in the technology have mainly made it’s outputs as generic as possible. None of this has to do with the Iron Giant, as he is a fictional character.
AI is riding the surface of a monster bubble and anyone gleefully waiting for the pop has no idea what that’s going to do the US economy, and then everyone elses.
All but 1% of US economic growth last year was AI development and speculation. Combine that with the US passing, for the first time, 200%+ on the Buffett Index and we are screwed.
For reference, the Buffett Index is total stock market valuation vs. GDP. There is better than twice the dollars in the stock market than we produce in a year. The index was around 130% in 1929 and 2008.
Naw, he a homie. He a real clanka.
Wasn’t he an alien?
My opinion of AI/LLMs aside, I think that even the joking use of a made-up slur against non-humans still legitimizes the general use of slurs (and many who use real slurs believe their targets are subhuman).
Wow, you don’t know who that is but you’d ask if we’d call him a clanker?
I am not inherently against “AI”. I am against LLM’s because they are both an ecological disaster and a social disaster.
Wasn’t the Iron Giant an alien? Not human made for profit?
AI is a tool. A Glock 9mm is a tool. A paintbrush is a tool.
Tools are only as good, or as harmful, as their users. If AI is being used to flood the internet with slop, that is a human decision. The fact that AI was used to generate the slop does not taint the AI itself in any meaningful way. On this platform, however, it is fashionable to hate AI.
The people who hate it here are either bad actors or have no real understanding of what AI is, what it does, or what it is for.
This is pretty close to how I think about it. AI (notably not generative) that was developed to sort bread and now is reprogrammed to detect cancer cells: Fantastic. Generative AI to search and cite multiple interacting manuals with thousands of pages each: probably ok with significant guardrails. Generative AI that drives up local electricity costs so someone can see their underage neighbor with 4 boobs: terrible. To extend your metaphor it’s like handing a glock to a toddler.
I completely agree with your statements the data centers are definitely a massive issue however to be fair they are a response to the growing use of AI. These are just for-profit corporations looking for a way to make more profit. The cost of constructing the data centers is significantly cheaper than the amount of money that they would make in the long run.
Why or how a gun is a tool?
A tool is any human-designed object that extends our ability to perform a task. That is the functional definition. Moral weight does not enter into the classification. By that definition, a gun is unambiguously a tool. A gun is engineered to apply controlled force at a distance. Humans use it for specific purposes: hunting animals for food, self-defense, deterrence, sport shooting, and as an instrument of the state via military and law enforcement. In every case, intent, judgment, and responsibility reside entirely with the human operator. The object itself has no agency, will, or decision-making capability. People often confuse what a tool can be used for with what a tool is. That confusion leads to emotional objections rather than logical ones. A scalpel cuts flesh. A chainsaw destroys wood. A nail gun can kill a person. None of those facts remove them from the category of “tool.” Harm potential does not negate tool status; it simply increases the responsibility of the user. This is directly analogous to AI. AI applies computation. A paintbrush applies pigment. A gun applies force. Different domains, same underlying principle: they are instruments that amplify human capability. If someone uses AI to generate spam, or a gun to commit violence, the fault lies with the human actor, not the instrument. If we redefine “tool” to exclude objects we are uncomfortable with, the definition collapses into incoherence. The correct framework is not to anthropomorphize tools, but to hold users accountable for how they are employed. That is why a gun is a tool, not philosophically, but functionally and unambiguously.
I see that you are okay with that as long it fits by definition, regardless the harm that some tools can cause. Thanks god U.S. abolished slavery. Cheers.
Yes… I am ok if the definition defines the object… As anyone should be? Thank god Britain stopped trying to take over the world. Bye.
