I think the point is that it actually hurts an ethics-based anti-AI argument to also claim that it has no utility, because the no-utility argument is weak and therefore makes the rest of the stance (i.e., the ethics-based argument) look weak by association.
Exactly, if you say that AI is ethically bad and doesn’t work, to someone who uses it and clearly sees it works well for them, it just invalidates your argument.
If you just stick to the ethics your argument can’t be dismissed in that way.
Yes! Another problem is, not everyone is using AI in the sense that people think of.
AI is a large field, it studies many different methodologies and aspects of automation, prediction, generation and observation, yet today most people outside the field use it for LLMs and image generation, which throws the baby out with the bath water.
In addition to that, there are publicly available LLMs, some have datasets obtained entirely from consenting parties and public domain works. You don’t have to pay billionaire technocratic fascist a single dime to use such marvelous tools computer scientists worked decades to bring forth.
A machine can never create art, it can never take responsibility and should never be allowed to make decisions, it’s a tool.
And you can also have at home your own LLM that you can supply your own power.
I feel like everyone here would like the same overall: not killing the planet, not build more data-centres in the middle of communities, and last but not least having a tool to assist and not to generate unreviewed slop.
We do need to develop now a way to protect the human curated content, that is the part that we want and care about.
Neocities is an interesting subject in this matter, most people there reject LLMs and have their own hand crafted page and content:
I think the point is that it actually hurts an ethics-based anti-AI argument to also claim that it has no utility, because the no-utility argument is weak and therefore makes the rest of the stance (i.e., the ethics-based argument) look weak by association.
Exactly, if you say that AI is ethically bad and doesn’t work, to someone who uses it and clearly sees it works well for them, it just invalidates your argument.
If you just stick to the ethics your argument can’t be dismissed in that way.
Yes! Another problem is, not everyone is using AI in the sense that people think of.
AI is a large field, it studies many different methodologies and aspects of automation, prediction, generation and observation, yet today most people outside the field use it for LLMs and image generation, which throws the baby out with the bath water.
In addition to that, there are publicly available LLMs, some have datasets obtained entirely from consenting parties and public domain works. You don’t have to pay billionaire technocratic fascist a single dime to use such marvelous tools computer scientists worked decades to bring forth.
A machine can never create art, it can never take responsibility and should never be allowed to make decisions, it’s a tool.
And you can also have at home your own LLM that you can supply your own power.
I feel like everyone here would like the same overall: not killing the planet, not build more data-centres in the middle of communities, and last but not least having a tool to assist and not to generate unreviewed slop.
We do need to develop now a way to protect the human curated content, that is the part that we want and care about.
Neocities is an interesting subject in this matter, most people there reject LLMs and have their own hand crafted page and content:
https://neocities.org/