Meet the AI vegans. They are refusing to use artificial intelligence for environmental, ethical and personal reasons
-
You can ask it to turn off the summaries. It still shows them but you can ask.
You know what I was thinking about the big summary at the top and completely forgot about the summaries in the result descriptions. But I'm not sure if that's DDG doing it, Bing (who they use as a backend), or the sites itself since I only see it on results from reddit and such.
-
This is deeply cynical.
The Platonic Ion makes similar cynical claims. The idea that art is mimetic is compelling enough without gen AI.
-
Why are you dissing on vegans? Veganism is legit, bro.
wrote last edited by [email protected]I'm not dissing on them. I am simply aware of how they are perceived in society.
-
I played around on an AI image generating website for a while. Eventually got bored with it.
-
I was talking about ai training on ai output, ai requires genuine data, having a feedback loop makes models regress, see how ai makes yellow pictures because of the ghibli ai thing
Sure, that mainly applies when it's the same model training on itself. If a model trains on a different one, it might retrieve some good features from it, but the bad sides as well
-
"AI" or LLMs are great for people without skill. They love them and get quite aggressive when you insult the machine.
wrote last edited by [email protected]I love the arguments: none
AI is broader than LLMs
When you're attacking an entire field with no arguments, and saying it's shit based on your feelings rather than facts, expect people to disagree
-
But yes. Exactly in the use of "Artificial Intelligence".
Artificial Intelligence is a wide field, consisting of a plethora of methods. LLMs like ChatGPT are part of this wide field, as per definition how researchers are describing the field.
The "intelligence" part is an issue though if taken literal, since we have no clear definition of what "intelligence" even is. Neither for human / natural intelligence, nor for artificial. But that's how the field was labled. We have created a category for a bunch of methods, models and algorithms and sticked "AI" onto it. Therefore I stand by what I have said before:
It is AI.
Due to the lack of a clear definition for "intelligence" I would coarsely outline AI as: mimicking natural thinking, problem solving and decision processes without necessarily being identical. (This makes it difficult to distinguish it from plain calculators though, so a better definition is required.) So if we have a model that is able to distinguish cat pictures from non-cat pictures, that's AI. And if we have "autocorrect on steroids" (credit to Dirk Hohndel) like ChatGPT, that matches the text comprehension skills of 15 year olds (just an example), then this too is AI.
Enjoy being downvoted for being right
-
I find it hilarious that most people in this thread are complaining about being called a "something vegan", like I can understand not being happy with the current AI trend, but it seems like the word "vegan" is what makes everyone ticks, it's NOT an insult, the "normal" vegan are very happy to be called like that, because what it refers too is something that they agree and identify with. If you agree and identify yourself with what those journalist are calling "AI vegans", the name doesn't matter, embrace it, call yourself that to easily express what you believe about AI.
Vegan is not an insult, it is a compliment.
-
"Newspaper which uses AI to write its articles concocts derogatory term for people who doesn't use AI"
Imo vegan shouldn't be seen as derogatory. I'm not one, but got a lot of respect for most of em.
-
So I'm gonna play devil's advocate here and say that it is. Look at your teeth, humans are omnivores. Cutting out half the diet you evolved to consume is in fact a contriarian position. Not that I have any issues with vegans or vegetarians, just from an anatomical point of view we were designed to eat some meat! I do think calling people who don't use AI "AI vegans" is absurd though, as diet has absolutely nothing to do with use of AI. Would be more accurate to say their AI fasting if we're gonna use food related terms.
It may be natural to eat animals, but in modern society it is definitely not necessary. I eat some meat, but I respect those who don't.
-
It's natural to eat animal products, but many humans try to live by ethical standards, not just instincts and traditions. Just because the stronger caveman used to be able to just bash their neighbor's head in and take their belongings, doesn't make it acceptable by today's standards.
So while I do agree with your initial assessment, considering that we have the option nowadays to have a healthy diet based on non animal products, I would also agree with the previous comment saying that it is not wacky contrarian to eat / live vegan.It is wacky/contrarian as we are still eating meat normally. LLM is stiiiill soso, but soon wacky/contrarian will also apply to not using it, sadly
-
Someone should launch a Project Poison which offers information to websites to protect themselves from scrapers and to poison and devalue AIs and companies that ignore their restrictions. I'm sure there are plenty of ways it could be done - nonsense about niche subjects, libelous facts about celebrities and people with money, false attribution for quotes & art, images captioned with things they do not contain, offensive slurs. Just feed AIs with sufficient trash and it will output trash.
Make a bunch of sites whose opinion on any topic eventually devolves into "and that's why billionaires should be hanged and their possessions destroyed"
Best way to make an espresso? Boil water, prepare the coffee grounds then execute a mob lynching on the nearest rich villa
-
We let environmentalism become an individual issue, and that was a mistake. Can we not do this for AI? It's a society-wide problem, not something you can solve by measuring your own personal AI footprint.
We let environmentalism become an individual issue, and that was a mistake.
Everyone knows it's not an individual issue, corporations are constantly buying up political shielding and support, as well as media opinions, to ensure that "the economy" remains more important than the environment and that they, the ones responsible for all the shit, don't get regulated or properly fined and blamed.
-
Creating demand for the alternatives funds their R&D and furthers their availability, which in turn leads to better products for lower prices, which makes further adoption much easier.
there is no causal link between any of those events, and increased demand decrease availability.
I don't really believe what economists claim, v but you don't even seem to know what they say in the first place
wrote last edited by [email protected]increased demand decrease availability
In the short term. Over the mid and long terms, highly profitable demand can induce supply in a free market system.
Solar and Wind electricity are both great cases in point. Once they became more cost-efficient to build and operate than coal plants, the demand for coal plummeted while the demand for new green installations surged.
I don’t really believe what economists claim
I'm inclined to follow the data, at least at first glance. We're entering a CO^2^ production peak, in large part thanks to the cost-spread between installing/operating new fossil fuel plants and their green peers.
There are other factors at play. I can't get the mysterious explosion of the Nordstream II pipeline out of my head and what the consequences of climate change are of that. Then there's the closing of the Suez trade and the collapse in development of Balkan Crude. But the incredibly cheap alternatives - largely pioneered and industrially propagated by the world's largest socialist state - can't be ignored as having a huge influence on consumption habits.
Can animal-free meat follow the same path? Idk, maybe. But given the way the US developers and investors had to be dragged kicking and screaming into a modern green grid, I suspect we'll see meat alternatives take off abroad long before they become truly popular in the US.
-
Works relatively well for image editing
Else yea I would agree, sometimes it's just shoved for nothing, but 90% seems like too much
Don't misunderstand, LLM's are fantastic for certain applications and it makes sense to use them. But seriously GTFO my email and search results. Generated speech? Ew. Generated videos? Nah. Ordering for me at a restaurant? Just kill me.
-
Sure, that mainly applies when it's the same model training on itself. If a model trains on a different one, it might retrieve some good features from it, but the bad sides as well
AI requires genuine data, period.
Go read about it instead of spewing nonsense. -
Enjoy being downvoted for being right
I don't care about votes. I just hope that people start to comprehend this field a tiny bit better .
-
I love the arguments: none
AI is broader than LLMs
When you're attacking an entire field with no arguments, and saying it's shit based on your feelings rather than facts, expect people to disagree
It's not really about feelings? It's provably, demonstrably wrong a bunch of the time. It's pathologically incapable of saying "I don't know this". Also you're nitpicking, they may have conflated LLMs with AI but so is the article and you clearly knew what OC was talking about.
-
But yes. Exactly in the use of "Artificial Intelligence".
Artificial Intelligence is a wide field, consisting of a plethora of methods. LLMs like ChatGPT are part of this wide field, as per definition how researchers are describing the field.
The "intelligence" part is an issue though if taken literal, since we have no clear definition of what "intelligence" even is. Neither for human / natural intelligence, nor for artificial. But that's how the field was labled. We have created a category for a bunch of methods, models and algorithms and sticked "AI" onto it. Therefore I stand by what I have said before:
It is AI.
Due to the lack of a clear definition for "intelligence" I would coarsely outline AI as: mimicking natural thinking, problem solving and decision processes without necessarily being identical. (This makes it difficult to distinguish it from plain calculators though, so a better definition is required.) So if we have a model that is able to distinguish cat pictures from non-cat pictures, that's AI. And if we have "autocorrect on steroids" (credit to Dirk Hohndel) like ChatGPT, that matches the text comprehension skills of 15 year olds (just an example), then this too is AI.
One fundamental part of "intelligence" is being able to come up with independent thoughts. Another is to be able to think critically about those thoughts. LLMs cannot do either.
-
What model and UI are you using?
Qwen 2.5 coder. Running on LLM studio.
