Lemmy be like
-
The problem isn't AI. The problem is Capitalism.
The problem is always Capitalism.
AI, Climate Change, rising fascism, all our problems are because of capitalism.
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. -
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.Can, would... and did. The list of environmental disasters in the Soviet is long and intense.
-
AI BAD, TRUMP BAD, CLIMATE CHANGE BAD, GENOCIDE BAD, CAPITALISM BAD, LIBERALS BAD, FASCISTS BAD, NAZIS BAD, INCELS BAD, CEOs BAD, LANDLORDS BAD, VIOLENCE BAD, CHILD SEX TRAFFICKING BAD.
Now where are my upvotes?
You forgot CEOs and landlords.
-
A hammer doesn't consume exorbitant amounts of power and water.
Neither does an algorithm.
-
There is a distinction between video game AI and computer science AI. People know that video game AI isn't really AI. How LLM is marketed by using terms like "super intelligence" is deception.
Don't you dare try to tell someone that though, they will be personally offended for some reason.
-
"Video games are dangerous."
So is rock music! And if you inject one Marijuana you can die!
-
Neither does an algorithm.
No, it actually does.
https://news.mit.edu/2025/explained-generative-ai-environmental-impact-0117
-
This post did not contain any content.
AI is bad and people who use it should feel bad.
-
They factually are. ML is AI. I think you mean AGI maybe?
GTFO with your nuanced and engaged understanding. This is Lemmy.
-
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
You're getting downvoted for speaking the truth to an echo chamber my guy.
-
A hammer doesn't consume exorbitant amounts of power and water.
Do you think hammers grow out of the ground? Or that the magically spawn the building materials to work on?
Everything we do has a cost. We should definitely strive for efficiency and responsibile use of resources. But to use this as an excuse, while you read this in a device made of metals mined by children, is pretty hypocritical.
No consumption is ehical under capitalism, take responsibility instead for what you do with that consumption.
-
There is a distinction between video game AI and computer science AI. People know that video game AI isn't really AI. How LLM is marketed by using terms like "super intelligence" is deception.
The broadest definition of AI i have found includes both video game AI and machine learning
The point i was trying to make was that LLMs are still AI, even if their marketing is misleading
-
No, it actually does.
https://news.mit.edu/2025/explained-generative-ai-environmental-impact-0117
The algorithm is a bunch of math. It's not until someone wants to run it that it needs any energy.
-
GenAI is a great tool for devouring text and making practice questions, study guides and summarize, it has been used as a marvelous tool for education and research. Hell, if set properly, you can get it to give you the references and markers on your original data for where to find the answers to the questions on the study guide it made you.
It is also really good for translation and simplification of complex text. It has its uses.
But the oversimplification and massive broad specs LLMs have taken, plus lack of proper training for the users, are part of the problem Capitalism is capitalizing on. They don't care for the consumer's best interest, they just care for a few extra pennies, even if those are coated in the blood of the innocent. But a lot of people just foam at the mouth when they hear "Ai".
Those are not valuable use cases. “Devouring text” and generating images is not something that benefits from automation. Nor is summarization of text. These do not add value to human life and they don’t improve productivity. They are a complete red herring.
-
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.
Stop drinking the cool aid bro. Think of these statements critically for a second. Environmental harm? Sure. I hope you're a vegan as well.
Loss of media literacy: What does this even mean? People are doing things the easy way instead of the hard way? Yes, of course cutting corners is bad, but the problem is the conditions that lead to that person choosing to cut corners, the problem is the demand for maximum efficiency at any cost, for top numbers. AI is is making a problem evident, not causing it. If you're home on a Friday after your second shift of the day, fuck yeah you want to do things easy and fast. Literacy what? Just let me watch something funny.
Do you feel you've become more stupid? Do you think it's possible? Why wouild other people, who are just like you, be these puppets to be brain washed by the evil machine?
Ask yourself. How are people measuring intelligence? Creativity? How many people were in these studies and who funded them?
If we had the measuring instrument needed to actually make categorizations like "People are losing intelligence." Psychologists wouldn't still be arguing over the exact definition of intelligence.Stop thinking of AI as a boogieman inside people's heads. It is a machine. People using the machine to achieve a mundane goal, it doesn't mean the machine created the goal or is responsible for everything wrong with humanity.
Huge increase in inequality? What? Brother AI is a machine. It is the robber barons that are exploiting you and all of the working class to get obsenely rich. AI is the tool they're using. AI can't be held accountable. AI has no will. AI is a tool. It is people that are increasing inequality. It is the system held in place by these people that rewards exploitation and encourages to look at the evil machine instead. And don't even use it, the less you know, the better. If you never engage with AI technology, you'll believe everything I say about how evil it is.
-
You forgot CEOs and landlords.
And the call for violence, because it splat as it's your team* doing it.
-
They factually are. ML is AI. I think you mean AGI maybe?
Could be, I get confused by the alphabet soup of acronyms. I mean these glorified predictive text machines that for some reason marketers are trying to push as having some sort of ability to "think".
-
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.While you aren't wrong about human nature. I'd say you're wrong about systems. How would the same thing happen under an anarchist system? Or under an actual communist (not Marxist-Leninist) system? Which account for human nature and focus to use it against itself.
-
Language is descriptive not prescriptive.
If people use the term "AI" to refer to LLMs, then it's correct by definition.
Not really, since "AI" is a pre-existing and MUCH more general term which has been intentionally commandeered by bad actors to mean a particular type of AI.
AI remains a broader field of study.
-
then you have little understanding of how genai works… the social impact of genai is horrific, but to argue the tool is wholly bad conveys a complete or purposeful misunderstanding of context
I'm not an expert in AI systems, but here is my current thinkging:
Insofar as 'GenAI' is defined as
AI systems that can generate new content, including text, images, audio, and video, in response to prompts or inputs
I think this is genuinely bad tech. In my analysis, there are no good use cases for automating this kind of creative activity in the way that the current technology works. I do not mean that all machine assisted generation of content is bad, but just the current tech we are calling GenAI, which is of the nature of "stochastic parrots".
I do not think every application of ML is trash. E.g., AI systems like AlphaFold are clearly valuable and important, and in general the application of deep learning to solve particular problems in limited domains is valuable
Also, if we first have a genuinely sapient AI, then it's creation would be of a different kind, and I think it would not be inherently degenerative. But that is not the technology under discussion. Applications of symbolic AI to assist in exploring problem spaces, or ML to solve classification problems also seems genuinely useful.
But, indeed, all the current tech that falls under GenAI is genuinely bad, IMO.
