Meet the AI vegans. They are refusing to use artificial intelligence for environmental, ethical and personal reasons
-
That's really stupid.
-
I don’t use ai either. But because it’s fuckin stupid. It’s not even ai. It’s a glorified sorting algorithm.
What would make it 'ai' in your mind?
-
What would make it 'ai' in your mind?
Sentience
-
Its neither for me, i just dont like getting wrong information and AI is giving tons of it.
Also its not intelligent it just fucking sounds so
I agree. AI would be way more useful if it gave some kind of indicator of accuracy, or even just saying "I don't know."
Right now, AI only doesn't have an answer when the goons who programmed it told it not to give one.
-
It is AI.
Not if you use "AI" as the abbreviation of "artificial intelligence".
If you use AI as meaning "what chatGPT & co are" then it's a trueism. -
Hard copium there
"AI" or LLMs are great for people without skill. They love them and get quite aggressive when you insult the machine.
-
Wow, so just like humans eating animal products throughout our early existence as beings, AI is the default position? What kind of bullsh*t is this? Just because billionaires are forcing these llms down our throats?
The propaganda is unreal.
-
"AI vegans" media trying to put an enemy up again. Smh
-
While billionaires keep using their private jets.
-
"AI vegans"? I knew guardian was already bought by tech bros, but wtf is that phrasing lmao I dont use AI either, simply because it is wrong more often than not and I am still capable of googling myself, but being cautious equals to being vegan in tech bro eyes?
Seems like it. Because vegan is already seen as a ridiculouse thing and "the enemy" by the average person
-
I'm technophobic. Fucking clankers
I see. Another one to serve the gloriouse republik!!
Long live chanclor palpatine! -
I want to avoid it but with google making sure that search results get worse and worse I'm in a bit of a pickle. Other search engines still feel lile they're a bit behind though
I use my boyfriends own browser.
Boyfriend, please explain it:Soooo, it's called searXNG. It's a metasearch engine I host locally. It searches across multiple search engines, like duck duck go and others. And then shows the results as a normal webpage. It also changes your "fingerprint" per every search, and every search/result is proxied through the server.
If you wanna try it out, you can use (public instance): searx.bndkt.io
But you can easily host it locally from the source or with docker. -
"refuse" lol as if there were a general requirement to use this shit
-
Not if you use "AI" as the abbreviation of "artificial intelligence".
If you use AI as meaning "what chatGPT & co are" then it's a trueism.wrote last edited by [email protected]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.
-
Eh. Factory farming is a significant contributor to greenhouse gases, particularly through methane released by large livestock herds.
But the industry is so saturated with subsidies and shielded from liabilities and exempted from taxes and so comically wasteful in its surplus production that there hasn't been any material benefit to veganism as a social movement. You can take a moral position (and you should, eating meat is awful for a variety of reasons). But there's no actual correlation between an increase in vegan eating habits and a decrease in agricultural emissions. All we ever get is more meat shipped abroad or thrown in the trash.
The real curb to agricultural production has been raw materials constraints - limits on arable land, potable water, and slaughterhouse workers - that have (directly or indirectly) emerged from a changed climate. Outside these limits, all we've really achieved is "Grapes of Wrath" style surplus destruction to keep retail prices up.
If a factory farm can produce another dead cow, it does, even if it can't reliably bring the carcass to market. The profit margins are set so artificially high that they'd be fools not to do so. Only herd die-offs resulting from heat waves, water shortages, and a lack of below-market migrant labor seem to dissuade them from trying to expand.
thank you. no matter how many times I point out the inefficacy of consumer choices or how I word it, I end up with bad faith and fact-avoidant responses like you got.
-
20 years ago you could have said "Well, solar panels might be great for sustainability in theory, but the fossil fuel industry is so overwhelmingly powerful and solar panels so bad and expensive, it's absolutely futile."
Now, over 90% of added power plants are renewable, because there was at least some pressure to implement alternatives, and now they have matured enough to become economically viable on their own.
I think there are certain parallels to factory farming and plant-based alternatives + cultivated meat. We know that factory farming is very unsustainable, especially in terms of climate impact, resource use and zoonotic diseases (like bird flu and swine flu). These issues become ever more pressing as factory farming continues. We just won't have a choice at some point but to switch to alternatives that are more sustainable, or everything goes to shit.
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. Advancing the alternatives might have a much bigger impact than the mere reduction in meat consumption.
The more early adopters, the faster new technologies can advance. That's true for every sustainable industry like solar energy, wind energy, battery storage, electric cars, and also meat alternatives.
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
-
the harder it is for AI developing companies to improve on previous models.
They all use each other's data to improve. That's federated learning!
In a way, it's good because it helps have more competition
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
-
No an Image generation is not ten times the impact pf a Google search, a ChatGPT query is. Image generation is probably a lot more.
-
Why does this use of the "vegan" word sound so condescending?
-
Have you tried Ecosia?
Not OP. I've been using Ecosia for years and was glad they didn't do the AI summary shit so far... But a few days ago I got an AI summary on Ecosia as well. I fear they're also hopping on this train and in that case I'll look for another search engine.
