Meet the AI vegans. They are refusing to use artificial intelligence for environmental, ethical and personal reasons
-
This makes about as much sense as calling Linux users "Windows vegans".
Choosing to not use AI isn't some wacky contrarian position, it's a tame position that can easily be justified. (Don't want to use AI? Then don't.) If anything, trying to assert that constantly using AI for everything would be the new normal is the wacky position.
Not eating animals is not a wacky contrarian position either, and I'm not even vegan
-
I’ve been using DuckDuckGo for over a decade, the results are fine, and !bangs are extremely useful for piping queries directly to specific sites, !w for wikipedia, !aw for archwiki, etc. The Duck.ai function is a recent addition, and it can be easily disabled if you don’t want it. By default it doesn’t usually pop up by itself. You can also use lite.duckduckgo.com for a much leaner search and absolutely no AI.
I was trying to use it for a long time, but the results are never fine for me. The situation when I search for something specific, the duck shows me nothing, and the google shows me exactly what I need is far too often for me to completely switch.
Granted, I don't keep cookies, I use all the adblocks possible, and I disabled google's LLM bullshit, otherwise google is borderline unusable. -
Not eating animals is not a wacky contrarian position either, and I'm not even vegan
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.
-
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.
wrote last edited by [email protected]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. -
The better term would be "LLM gobbling fuckheads" for those who use that stuff and believe it has anything to do with "AI"
-
Let's not call it that
-
Journalists constantly trying to be the origin of a term.
-
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.
