this post was submitted on 05 Nov 2024
321 points (97.6% liked)

shitposting

1606 readers
19 users here now

Rules •1. No Doxxing •2. No TikTok reposts •3. No Harassing •4. Post Gore at your own discretion, Depends if its funny or just gore to be an edgelord.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 14 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone 24 points 3 days ago (2 children)
[–] ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net 2 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Weird stance but okay.

Don't blame the technology. Blame the capitalism and greed of motherfuckers who abuse it.

[–] UrLogicFails@beehaw.org 3 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Even if you felt comfortable dismissing the environmental impacts of burning down a rainforest because you were too lazy to Google a picture of a factory fire, GenAI as a technology is morally indefensible at its core, since it is based entirely on theft.

I have seen scores of people defend the theft saying intellectual property is the true crime, etc. And while I agree IP laws are abused by massive conglomerations, GenAI isn't just stealing from them. It's stealing from every writer and artist on the planet. Anyone who has ever posted their art online to share with their community has had their art hoovered up by for-profit institutions who then sell it to the masses.

GenAI could only be a morally viable technology if: A) It didn't consume an ungodly amount of energy to run it B) You run a model who's training data was entirely sourced by you to only include sources that have given permission and are properly compensated (if necessary)

A does not seem likely in the foreseeable future; and while B is possible, the scale of data required for constructing a GenAI model, makes it basically infeasible for the average user.

With all of that said, I think it is valid to conclude the technology of GenAI is just as reprehensible as the morally bankrupt corporations that vend it.

While I do not think the users are inherently bad people did using GenAI, there are much more eco-friendly and less theft-based alternatives that are just as easy; and I think it's questionable to throw those out the window for the rainforest-burning, plagiarism machine...

[–] ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net 1 points 3 days ago

If you really think AI is only generating shitty pictures, you're gonna be in for a really bad time and might as well live in the woods now.

I hate a lot of AI today. But I'm also a realist and know when technology will shift our entire lives. This is one of them.

[–] kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 3 days ago (1 children)

The technology sucks too, it creates souless garbage

[–] ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Fair enough. Your position is yours.

I'm just saying if AI didn't suck I wouldnt be able to immediately identify that image as AI generated.

[–] rain_worl@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

counterpoint: fuck affine transformations meant for making an image appear ho be on a surface

[–] irish_link@lemmy.world 9 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Why is this Shitposting. If done properly and with no response from the company is entirely accurate.

[–] jaggedrobotpubes@lemmy.world 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Yeah great meme and great vibe in the wrong place.

Cannot bring myself to downvote.

[–] TriflingToad@sh.itjust.works 0 points 3 days ago

I was in the same position... till I realized it was AI made.

[–] Fidel_Cashflow@lemmy.ml 4 points 3 days ago

-20 gallons of water

[–] onlooker@lemmy.ml 3 points 3 days ago (1 children)

True, but where's the fun in that?

[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 days ago

It's fun to get paid more