Outside of the privacy and environmental issues at this point AI isn’t a fleshed out product yet it’s being pushed into apps that don’t need it. I think AI development needs to continue, and the public needs to use it and apply it in was it likely wasn’t intended for but it needs to be opt in.
Pretty sus how much pro-AI slop is suddenly on lemmy right as GPT5 is about to be launched.
Be less fucking obvious, you dipshits.
amazing example of the person described in the post!
I dont evento understand your point. His are both things related?
I will stop freaking out when naive techbro men stop the ecological mass murder and ecological discussion that they supposedly NEED to do to sustain their shitty knockoff of a religion/cult.
Silicon valley is just a convoluted project to revive prey enlightenment Christianity, but stupider and more evil.
Everything they have peoduced since 2008, if not earlier, is part of this.
ITT: exactly what the tweet was about.
Y’all just saw “AI” and started frothing at the mouth about LLMs when, in the context of the tweet, it might just as well have referred to path finding AI in a video game.
Seriously, I don’t get the issue but I understand the phenomenon. It’s like painters when the camera was invented,
“cameras will put us out of work, cameras are lower quality, anyone with a camera can just take a picture!”
Painters are still around, painted art is still desired and expensive. It will be the same over time with AI, we just have to wait for people to get over it.
Can be applied to any new technology. This comic was made before generative AI was a thing.
As always, there’s an xkcd for that…lol
To quickly further expand on my previous example with a few I thought of afterwards,
- the wax cylinder will kill live music
- the radio will kill live music
- the TV will kill radio
- the airplane will kill the cruise lines
Are cruise lines as a mode of transportation still around? Cruise ships are for leisure now, but they were previously much more prevalent.
I was just pointing out that they still exist, basically they adapted and remained in business.
Idk how comparable it is, the success they had faded, the popularity decreased heavily.I wouldn’t call just survival a good outcome.
I don’t think many people considered taking a cruise ship for a regular passage in which the Mode of transportation wasnt a big part of the attraction (unless they are scared of flying, I guess)
There are still airships around, but they are a rare thing.
They changed their business model from a mode of transport to a mode of vacation. The profits for major cruise lines are in the billions so really it’s more than surviving.
Industry adapts or changes, buggy makers become car companies, radio stations started also broadcasting TV signals, cable companies started offering Internet, and cruise lines started offering vacations rather than transportation.
As for airships, they were set back by The Hindenburg and USS Akron & Macon crashing. But they are starting to make a comeback, most are just focusing on cargo ships at the moment. It’ll take time since The Hindenburg is burned into everyone’s brain, but as people get used to seeing cargo blimps and larger cargo airships flying around and not crashing, they may just come to accept it and treat it like a mini cruise ship. Spend a few days flying over scenic spots and relaxing then disembark.
But tbf ‘AI’ in current public discourse and pop culture is (annoyingly) used synonymously with ‘LLM’ more often than not
deleted by creator
I wasn’t talking about AI at all, I was talking about people talking about AI.
AFAICT the OP was talking about vocaloid. https://sexygaywizard.tumblr.com/post/739313272247009280/some-of-yall-will-see-the-word-ai-and-freak-out#notes
Well when you’re done not talking about AI feel free to join the discussion.
Exactly, it’s downright comical how well OP called it.
Aren’t you OP? Also, people currently understand “AI” (a marketing term) as “LLMs” and audiovisual producing software. Had you mentioned it in the late 90s, it would’ve been more about “The Matrix” kind of sci-fi AI, for instance, and before it would’ve referred to Cameron’s Terminators or Herbert’s “machine intelligence”. Words and their context. You’re being purposely obtuse because people here wrote thoughtful comments disagreeing with the premise in the image you posted (and apparently agree with) and you don’t like it as it makes you feel silly. That’s all.
OP in this case would be the Tumblr user sexygaywizard who made the post in the image
Usually we’d use the term “OOP” to refer to the OP of the original post in this context. Helps make it clearer.
Object Oriented Programming
Thanks commenter! That’s why I posted it. I knew this would happen.
AI Slop Eaters need to know their bullshit is unacceptable, Fuck AI.
In your opinion, how should AI be handled now that it is out of the box?
Heavily regulated on the data it is trained on, respectful of copyright laws, with caps on electricity cost, and also explicitly banned for use in customer service, finances, infrastructure, engineering, research, medicine, legal practice, and sales. That also extends to programmers who work for those industries.
Basically, anybody trying to turn a profit from such a shitty non-product should fuck off. I also reserve the right to tell AI Sloppers to fuck off in other contexts, because it has no use case.
But, to be clear, I am referring to LLMs and Generative AI who create statistical models of language, and similar AI made to operate equipment after training on footage, not other learning algorithms used to make statistical models of things like which drug has an attachment point or which mice have cancer.
So when this gets posted as a post it gets hundreds of upvotes but when I say the same thing as a lemmy comment I get hate?
First of all the title implies this is a joke, secondly posts always get more upvotes than comments, some apps even auto like a post if you click on it to open the comments.
threads, comments, posts and etc all have completely different ecosystems.
Yes. Because one is posted as a joke, and one is an un-ironic “observation.” I’ll let you figure out which is which. Maybe go ask an AI if you have trouble figuring that one out.
The comparison is bunk though.
The awareness of systemic oppression is not equivalent to a technology that produces text and images of dubious provenance.
But conservatives reacting to the word “pronouns” isn’t at all about systemic oppression? It’s about the immediate brain off that follows to instantly rant about “woke” or whatever, even if e.g. someone mentioned pronouns in a grammar context. It’s a stupid reaction born from opposition to a perceived “woke mind virus” (or equivalent).
Similarly, some people read “AI” and immediately think whatever follows is worthless garbage. Which, even ignoring that not everything labeled AI is always ML, is a stupid reaction born from opposition to the LLM (and general genAI) hype.
Sure, the “woke mind virus” is pure delusion, and I, too, want to throw up from the genAI hype every time someone mentions “AI” or “ChatGPT”, but AI isn’t even well defined and even ML has plenty of useful applications.
It’s the same anti-intellectual “I hate the things I associate with this word so anyone not hating on the word is stupid” while disregarding what the word actually means in the given context.
I think you’re assuming people are having a knee jerk, ignorant response, because you have come to a different conclusion than they have.
My dislike of consumer AI is very well informed. I’ve built my own local models and used generative AI extensively for work (no choice). I was actually pretty excited for the technology before the corps started using it as their latest accelerationist cudgel in the class war.
As it stands, I think it’s hard to justify using AI, even as a casual consumer. For many reasons that are already well documented.
It is a knee jerk reaction because it does not look at the context.
You can be talking about AI in a medical protein folding context, and you will still have people call it “slop”.
That specific use case is often brought up as an example of “good AI use” even among people who are opposed to the commercial models, so even if it was an apt comparison, I don’t think your assertion holds much water.
Further, aren’t you assuming my context if you think, for example, that I’m an ignorant hater because I’m hating on some gen AI web comic? Or nebulous defense of AI, like in the op?
Is this exchange one of the data points you mentally tally when you think of contextless, knee jerk reactions to all uses of AI? Because in this case right here, you would clearly be wrong.
I’m not against all ML/AI when applied in the right context.
I have no idea what point you’re trying to get across but I just got back from shopping for a laptop for my college kid and pretty much all of them had a slop button
I’m really happy with my ASUS Zenbook 14 (16GB memory, 512GB SSD, Intel Core Ultra 7 255H), which I got for $700, in case you’re still looking for a recommendation. Absolutely worth it IMO, though I’m running Linux, so the Copilot key is mapped to the compose key.
Went with an Acer. Best keyboard, tiny screen borders for a fairly compact 16” screen, 32G, 2TB, 3.1 lb …. I forget which CPU, we looked at so many.
The big question is battery life, and we decided to risk it. For a claimed 9.5 hours battery life when new, will it still get through a realistic full day of classes for the next four years. Hopefully
I’ve had good experiences with Acer with previous laptops, so that was probably a good choice. Best of luck to your kid!
Thanks
That’s awesome, back in my day, we had to spit in our homemade fleshlights to get the slop.
If you are still looking https://frame.work/ I didn’t see any ai slop button on these.
I might consider that for myself, next time I need one, but the kid is not a techie. He needs something that just works, with anything he may encounter , for at least 4 years. Most damning of all he probably needs to be able to game, and is not interested in having to figure out extra steps
Fucking love my Framework 16 and I’ll tell everyone every chance I get.
Let’s cook the fucking planet so we can generate stupid images we’re too lazy to photoshop! What’s not to like?
“AI” is not just LLMs or diffusion models, and that’s what I think OPs is about, like, do you also hate Stockfish? Or enemies in a videogame?
Also, some things are called AI that aren’t. People are freaking out as soon as the term is mentioned without checking if it’s actually some sort of model or if it’s just a basic algorithm with a buzzword tossed on.
Exactly
How often do you think that this confusing actually results in people acting as described in the tweet?
Context matters, and the people who are the audience for tweets about stockfish are aware of the nuance. Outside of niche communities, “AI” without additional explicit context means LLMs for the vast vast majority of the time.
If this isn’t a strawman, then it’s at least a misleading argument.
Saying AI = LLMs is an severe oversimplification though. LLMs and image generators are subsets of AI that are currently most prominent and with which is most commonly knowingly being interacted with, but pretty much every formal definition is wider than that. Recommendation algorithms, as used on YouTube or social media, the smart (photo) search, are further examples of AI that people interact with. And fraud detection, learning spam filters, abnormality (failure) detection, traffic estimation are even more examples. All of these things are formally defined as AI and are very much commonplace, I would not call them niche.
The fact that LLMs and image generators are currently the most prominent examples does not necessarily exclude other examples from being part of the group too.
Using AI as a catch all phrase is simply a case of overgeneralization, in part due to the need of brevity. For some cases the difference does not matter, or is even beneficial. For example, ‘don’t train AI models on my art’ would only marginally affect applications other than image generation and image analysis, and covers any potential future applications that may pop up.
However, statements ‘ban AI’ could be easily misconstrued, and may be interpreted in a much wider manner than what the original author may have intended. There will be people with a variety of definitions to what does or does not constitute AI, which will lead to miscommunication unless it is clear from context.
It probably wouldn’t hurt clarifying things specifically and talking about the impact of a specific application, rather than discussing what is (or is not) to be classified as AI.
It’s like you saw my response, and processed exactly none of it before you replied.
Did I say this is how it should be? No. I was describing the way it actually is. It’s not me who is oversimplify, this is just the way it is used in pop culture. It doesn’t matter at all how much you don’t like that, because we cannot be prescriptive about actually irl usage of a word.
Am I personally aware of the difference? Yes. I work with LLMs every day as part of my job, both as a tool and as a product.
None of this, or what you wrote, changes that in common discourse, outside of niche communities, “AI” is synonymous with “LLM” and GPT content image generators, almost exclusively, unless other context is provided.
So when people see “AI” in common discourse, they’re almost always right to assume it means LLMs and GPT content generators.
Tbh in my experience LLM and other recently developed techniques such as stable diffusion are referred to as GenAI by most lay people. For both lay people and technical audience, i.e. people who work in machine learning, AI has a much broader significance.
The people I see using “gen AI” are people who are peripheral to the experts or enthusiasts (be it enthusiastically for or against).
They’re not the people making the LLMs, they’re the people integrating LLMs into their own products, or they’re part or sales or procurement for such products. Gen-ai is very much the b2b marketing speak for these technologies.
But I don’t see it used as often in the broader context of social media or mainstream media, outside of the niches that those experts and enthusiasts frequent.
“AI” in videogames is basically never powered by large models like LLMs or Stable Diffusion or others. The fact you compare them only demonstrates how fucking little you actually know about this topic you are BLINDLY defending.
Not sure why you’re getting downvoted, most video game enemies do not learn. They can have some clever algorithms, but they don’t know anything about how you’ve responded in the past and which of their tactics work better against you. Have they been trained on player interaction at all? I would love to see some learning NPCs in games and would be happy to dial down graphics settings to power them instead.
Most game ai is state machines and just extensions of the gameloop
I’m getting downvoted because there are too many morons who now think they know computer science just because they use “AI”… Such a pathetic lot literally ignorant to their own ignorance.
I hate stockfish because it keeps beating me >:(
You’re correct in a technical sense but incorrect in a social sense. In 2025, “AI” in the common vernacular means LLMs. You can huff and puff about it, and about how there are plenty of non-LLM AIs out there. But you might as well complain that people mean silicon-based Turing-complete machines when they refer to a “computer,” even though technically a computer can mean many other things. You might as well be complaining about how a computer could refer to someone that does calculations by hand for a living. Or you could refer to something like Babbage’s difference engine as a computer. There are many things that can technically fall under the category of “computer.” But you know damn well what people are saying when they describe a computer. And hell, in common vernacular, a smart phone isn’t even a “computer,” even though it literally is just a computer. Words have both technical and vernacular meanings.
In 2025, in the language real speak in the real world, “AI” is a synonym for “LLM.”
That’s a great point and you are right, most people don’t know/don’t care about the technical differences
It’s a failure of our education systems that people don’t know what a computer is, something they interact with every day.
While the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis might be bunk, I’m convinced that if you go up one level in language structure there is a version of it that is true. That is treating words as if they don’t need a consistent definition melts your brain. For the same reason that explaining a problem to someone else helps you solve it, doing the opposite and untethering your thoughts from self-consistant explanations stops you from explaining them even to yourself, and therefore harms your ability to think.
I wonder if this plays some part in how ChatGPT use apparently makes people dumber, that it could be not only because they become accustomed to not having to think, but because they become conditioned to accept text that is essentially void of consistent meaning.
That’s really the crux of this stupid argument. Is a neural network that analyzes x-rays before handing them to a doctor AI? I would say no. At this point, AI means “over hyped LLM and other generalist models.” But the person trying to judge others over AI would say yes.
Is a neural network that analyzes x-rays before handing them to a doctor AI? I would say no.
The term “AI” is already pretty fuzzy even in the technical sense, but if that’s how you’re using it then it doesn’t mean anything at all.
Most people on Lemmy seem to define AI as “evil machine learning that i don’t like” vs non-AI as everything else. It’s a wee bit delusional.
While you are correct that AI is a horrible source of greenhouse gas due to its insatiable need for power, I wouldn’t call the people using it the make pictures “too lazy to learn Photoshop”. Being able to draw is a talent not everyone has and it’s kind of amazing to be able to make a picture you see in your mind without having the innate talent to do so. That being said, the people who have the talent who’s art has been used to train these AI systems should be broadly compensated for their work being used in the AI models.
I despise whenever someone talks like this about drawing. Everyone can draw. Nobody was born being able to make masterpieces from day one. It’s not some mystical arte that only those with the Chosen One gene can do. It all comes down to a willingness to try and to learn. That’s it. Using “talent” to bar yourself from doing so is only doing yourself a disservice. Even drawing silly little stick men is still practice, and I can attest to that from both first and second-hand experience. Just pick up a pencil, or boot up paint on a computer (but please, at least download paint.net or something), and you’ll find that you can indeed draw, you just have to do it enough to gain confidence. It’s like walking, or driving a car. I don’t see anyone saying that some people have innate driving talent and some don’t.
Hence why I didn’t say people who don’t do it are lazy. Laziness is an inherently capitalist ideal, saying that those who aren’t constantly working are somehow lesser. However, those who don’t at least try tend to quote the idea of a “lack of talent”, which is simply not true or helpful. Everyone is able to draw, though some may need some help in doing so. It’s part of being alive.
Equating someone lacking talent for something with literally being disabled is a pretty stupid take.
That’s absolute bullshit. I spent years trying to get good at drawing. I bought lots of books on how to draw and was never able to make anything that didn’t look like it was made by a 5 year old. I even learned Photoshop and Illustrator cause I thought that those would be a gateway for me to get better. Spoilers, it didn’t.
So go fuck yourself with your “everyone can draw” horseshit argument. No, not everyone can draw. And it doesn’t just take “working hard at it till you’re good”. You have to have talent. I fucking don’t, as well as lots of others out there.
And I said in my comment as well as many other places, these AI drawing sites need to compensate the people who’s talent they, at this point in time, have stolen. Just because I think the technology has purpose doesn’t mean I don’t think that there are problems with it.
You know, Ben Shapiro is a failed hollywood screenwriter. Maybe you can jump on Fox News and become a panelist complaining that M&Ms can’t wear sexy shoes anymore or something, too.
Art can be made out of literally anything. Trash, pieces of fabric, some chalk on a sidewalk, spray cans, arrangement of random objects, sea shells, etc. People will still love to look at shitty sketches and cute chibis and eagerly repost that art. Your medium doesn’t have to be just paper and pencil, nor just an expensive digital screen and a paid paint program, but even then digital can be free. Kritia, MS Paint, Sketchbook, IbisPaint, Fossify Paint, and many more are free and easy to download on Android. Procreate is cheap and loved by many. There are people doing this shit on their phone with their finger and a lot of determination.
None of these artists started out making masterpieces, they had to take the time to get to where they are and learn. Thousands of free tutorials are online, on both YT and other social media platforms, for any kind of art medium. Years of work and practicing every day. Even for those who are making masterpieces now, they take probably days or weeks to finish off a major project, they can’t just pump that shit out.
If you can’t draw or photoshop images well, that’s fine, as not everyone is able to do that skill. I want to learn to draw, but I can recognize that I probably don’t have to time right now in my life to do that, nor will I likely be able to reach the level I dream of, and I accept that. But the moment you decide to get mad at the people opposing AI art and using AI to Photoshop, or you yourself ever use AI to do such acts, then I will gladly call you a lazy bastard. You can’t have your cake without the effort that others put in to do it, and if you’re doing it for commercial purposes, you should be dragged through the streets.
Art is art because a human put their thoughts and feelings behind it. It causes discussion, whether good, bad, happy, angry, etc. AI art is only amazing on the surface, “wow, we have the tech to do this” and then it stops being amazing. Either way am artist/digital designer or don’t make whatever it is you wanted. Using AI to make art is embarrassing.
Art can be made out of literally anything.
Such as LLMs.
Art is art because a human put their thoughts and feelings behind it.
You don’t think there’s any thought put into AI art by the creators?
Art is art, it doesn’t matter what tool or medium was used, what matters is it reflects the artists intention or vision.
Art is art, it doesn’t matter what tool or medium was used, what matters is it reflects the artists intention or vision.
Well, is it really your vision or intention if it pulled from the efforts and thoughts of a million others to generate your picture?
Every art is pulled from the efforts and thoughts of million others.
Star Wars is pulled from Dune, which on itself was based upon Middle Eastern History and Religions.
Everything is build on the shoulders of giants.
Ideas pulled only from the efforts and thoughts of a million others is typically called plagiarism.
Art is art, it doesn’t matter what tool or medium was used, what matters is it reflects the artists intention or vision.
Based. Nothing triggers redditors and chuds alike than recognizing the value in all art.
Based. Nothing triggers redditors and chuds alike than recognizing the value in all art.
^ This matches my intentions and vision completely, so it’s mine now.
yeah honestly I don’t really care much for AI art and I think the vast majority of it looks kind of creepy in the uncanny valley sense but at least I have the self-awareness to recognize that it is a personal preference. These anti-ai bros seem to have no distinction between “I don’t like <thing>” and “<thing> is unethical” on top of being just generally insufferable pricks so I try to avoid them as much as possible.
You don’t think there’s any thought put into AI art by the creators?
I think it is vanishingly small, if present at all. Like watching somebody artistically pick which youtube video to watch while eating.
While we’re discussing what is and isn’t art, I just want to also chime in and point out that art can also be literature, or music, or dance.
Let’s cook the fucking planet so we can generate stupid images we’re too lazy to photoshop!
Decided to look into it, and a loose estimate (it’s hard to find data on the power usage of photoshop) is that 1 minute of photoshop average is about 1 gen image at 4k output.
Which means depending on use case and experience, an AI spun up locally to make something quickly would use far less electricity
Without training I assume? (Which on top of that almost always violates liscenses)
Without training, but once you’ve trained one model then that model can be used by millions.
An equivalent comparison would be the resources used by millions learning Photoshop in order to use it in the first place.
Well my iPhone 14 Pro gets really hot really quickly and the battery is comparable to a countdown app when I load a totally local LLM
You can run AI off of renewable energies too. This isn’t an issue of AI. It’s an issue of capitalism.
You could do a lot of things, but that’s not what is happening so here we are!
Also, to be clear, “AI” is just a marketing term for LLM. You’re describing it as a capitalism problem but it’s a product of capitalism and they’re using it to make more money for themselves while it uses things people created as source material with the power of fossil fuel.
That is pretty fucked up.
Sure, it could be powered by renewables and it could be used to benefit humanity, but could doesn’t count for shit when it’s being powered by fossil fuels and used to manipulate and even kill people.
Could and are: Two very different things.
How is AI a marketing term for LLM? Aren’t LLMs neural networks, which is an AI technique?
It sure bugs me how everyone suddenly started to use the word “AI” exclusively to refer to LLMs, but the term is not wrong either.It’s AI the same way the CPU players in NHL ‘94 are AI
The video game industry has it’s own definition of what an “AI” is, which is very different than everywhere else.
To a layman, no it’s not and should not be viewed as the same, either. One is a MASSIVE stack of precomputed matrices (NOT a neural network), the other a stack of predetermined algorithms with some random() thrown in.
They are all actually and literally completely different in form, function, and computing requirement.
The precomputed matrices are definitely a neural network. GPT literally stands for generative pre-trained transformer, a transformer being a well known neural network architecture.
No, a neural network is explicitly a type of architecture that mimics neurons. A transformer is just that: a methematical operation.
You’re making the mistake of calling a backhoe a “tractor” just because it’s also used for moving dirt around… Yes, both are heavy machinery, but that doesn’t magically make the terms interchangeable.
Could is what should be. That is what we also should act according towards.
Instead of attacking symptoms, attack the root cause. Which still is capitalism. Corpos will use energy that damages the environment because they will seek the most profits and least expenses under a market economy.
LLMs and AI would still be developed under any other system. Capitalism doesn’t invent things, all it invents are ways to commodify things.
Funny. AI’s commosification of creative effort itself is what most people are hating on. Hate capitalism’s commodification on everything? Then you might consider hating the paragon of commodification built on theft!
Let’s cook the fucking planet so we can generate stupid images we’re too lazy to photoshop!
You’re kinda proving the point of post. That’s literally what everyone here thinks of when someone says Ai
Because it’s true.
It’s broadly true, and that’s more to do with how it is used than what it is.
If an amoral corporation is providing it as a service, you can bet it’s using energy as cheap and dirty as it can get away with, and using as much water as it wants.
But that’s not the only way. You can run these things with renewable energy and no water. In those cases, the training is still a problem of course.
Think
Then they wouldn’t be hyping and defending the current state of the “AI”
I agree with you in spirit, but I think at this point AI uses less global energy than video games, and the internet generally seems to think video games good, AI bad.
Thanks for providing an example
Yesterday I saw a guy attacked on fuck_ai because he wasn’t extreme enough with his anti ai attitude.
I commented to him, only said I thought that his comment was valid and got promptly deleted.
Is this the new sub tweeting? Whining in a shitpost sub about how you got modded for continuing to support a logical fallacy after the mod said knock it off?
It was not a logical fallacy to begin with and I only had one comment and it was only to the guy who was attacked, not to anyone else.
What do you care so much where I talk about how obnoxious fuck_ai has become? It’s a stupid cult, that doesn’t want any dissenting opinions and people are attacked for not being extreme enough. A sewer.
Yeah, the church of anti-AI is loud, obnoxious, and obstinate.
I couldn’t give a fuck less if you want to amuse yourself with scuffed images of anime girls with three tits and lobster claws. Knock yourself out.
But if you think people are going to sit politely while institutions inflict these bullshit techbro fidget spinners unto us at the cost of our humanity and the planet then you’ve lost the plot.
[slopping intensifies]
I have never seen anyone other than tech bros hype AI. Quite the opposite, I only see people raging on AI.
I guess I should make some sort of clever comment about a mirror here but it looks like I’ve run out of shits to give. Good chat!
Gee do you think maybe there’s some good fuckin reasons for that
You must only be reading web forums like Lemmy/Reddit. I think society as a whole is very excited by the idea of AI.
Companies everywhere have been racing to be the first to add AI to their products, for instance. Not just tech bro companies either. Everybody.
Companies hopping on a fad bandwagon doesn’t mean that the public in general wants it.
You got me wondering, and it seems like opinion is mixed among US adults
Overall, we saw mixed emotions around the rise of AI. 39% of Americans feel positive about AI while 20% feel negative. The most commonly expressed emotion was curiosity, followed by interest and worry.
It seems to hold true internationally too
People are most likely to say they are concerned (32%), curious (30%), and hopeful (27%) about artificial intelligence. … 24% of respondents said AI will make our lives better. 41% of respondents think AI will make our lives both better and worse. Only 10% of respondents think AI will only make our lives worse
Me too. Especially here in Lemmy. Definitely way more people rage about it. Rarely I see people being obnoxious by promoting it.
There are extremist on both sides. But at least the anti-AI group has environmental responsibility on their side.
Environmental responsibility? That’s the only real argument they have and even that is on shaky ground.
Ahh yes, not the literal theft of billions of peoples’ work. Not prematurely replacing jobs with machines. Those are all totally cool things LLMs are doing!
… You and your type are fucking clowns.
I beg to differ. Anti ai is way bigger on Lemmy than pro. You can see this even by the likes.
Second part is about semantics of ai. We use the term AI because that kind of stuck. Everybody uses the term. It makes no sense to every time rage about what it means specifically, especially since most people do fairly understand what it is.
Clearly they do not know what it is when they say, “LLMs and video game AI are the same thing!” No. No they aren’t. At all. In basically every case, they are wholly different.
No idea what you are talking about. The largest majority cals LLMs artificial intelligence. Because lnguistically, LLM is simply a subtyp of AI.
In public discourse and marketing, “AI” has become a blanket term for anything that learns and writes like a human, and LLMs fit the bill. So as a linguistic shortcut, when LLMs got popular, people replaced that specific kind of AI with just “AI. By definition, an LLM is a kind of AI, a specialized system trained on massive text to generate language, making it a clear hyponym of AI. That relationship justifies calling LLMs simply AI.
There is also because of generic reference: It’s easier to say “I used AI” than to specify “I prompted a 175B‑parameter transformer model.”
I sorry dude, but these are jusy linguistic mechanism at play. You can shout and complain so you want, it’s AI. It’s AI. Get over it, find a different hill to die on.
So sorry for criticizing AI for very serious problems that will affect me in my lifetime. What a piece of shit I am, please forgive me!
That’s not what the post is about? How do you know I don’t agree with you? This post is about people, not AI.
AI only exacerbates an existing problem with tech; AI datacenters pollute and consume because datacenters pollute and consume
a lot of things many people do online, including watching videos or playing online games, are super polluting. yet no one talks about this
you don’t care about the environment, you care about AI
Wildly presumptive and incorrect statement about me, but you are right about data centers.
On that note, it’s worth pointing out that some fediverse instances are powered by renewables! It’s small compared to the Internet at large, but it’s a start.
i saw someone on masto mad about the new background removal thing added to kdenlive
i despise llms and image models for quite a number of reasons but just aaaaaaaaaaaaa
that is absolutely the coolest thing I have seen in technology in years
There definitely is a very real “AI derangement syndrome” kinda thing going around among some. It’s like…we can be opposed to the use of AI to take away people’s jobs while simultaneously dumbing down culture, without throwing out the ways it can actually be used by workers to improve their work output or the experience for them of doing the work. I’m not familiar with Kdenlive, but it sounds similar to Photoshop’s generative fill, and that’s a fantastic feature. Using AI to do a better version of what content-aware fill has done for over a decade. People who are opposed even to these uses need to pull their heads in, because they make it much harder to effectively oppose the real problems with AI.
Your comment makes sense IMO.
To make an enormous simplification, it’s like those who screamed “rape!” because someone had looked (in a wrong way) at them. It removes the credibility of real rape.
Sorry, it’s early and I couldn’t find a nicer analogy, I posted it anyways because it’s an important distinction IMO, “AI” isn’t burning the planet or taking your jobs, some saves your grandma from cancer, LLM and image generators does.
Also, and this is only what I think, Art is also used in this way, some person drawing a panda for some company is now an Artist. I mean maybe they are but that panda can be made by a image generator (if it can be done cheaply) and free up their creative potential to do other things.
And also, it’s not like someone has a plan how to make things better, it’s just “forbid it” (good luck with that) or being angry online.
The world is black and white for many people.
Sorry, it’s early and I couldn’t find a nicer analogy
I mean, you coulda just gone with “the boy who cried wolf”.
Crying Wolf is making something up though so not exactly the same.
content-aware fill was even started as a fucking GIMP plugin of all things
Move over gamers, AI shills are the most discriminated group now!
Branding something as “AI” just tells me that there probably wasn’t anybody critically examining the output to assess that it wasn’t 100% BS. If you’re using computer technology to scan bodies for possible early cancer symptoms, for example, then you should have a professional look over the computer’s results and you shouldn’t use the marketing terms that are used for churning out brainless media content.
Branding something as “AI” just tells me that there probably wasn’t anybody critically examining the output to assess that it wasn’t 100% BS.
I think those two ideas are completely unrelated. LLMs are indeed an application of AI, and whether someone assesses its output has nothing to do with what they call the tool. I mean, people can be selectively specific in the areas that matter, but it doesn’t mean they’re wrong or obtuse across the board.
If I’m seeing the word “AI” outside of academic research or shitposting, it’s almost certainly coming from a Techbro or techbro simp.
It has been my experience that things go the other way around. Usually people read the text (or programming script), see that it’s nonsense and ask, “Is this fucking AI? Cause I really hope no one is actually this stupid.”
And then they get annoyed that someone is cooking the planet using AI instead of their brain.
I agree, they should be more like me and use their brain to cook the planet
The pronouns of LLMs are typically “useless/drivel”
Fuck ai and fuck ai simps.
