Lemmy be like
-
It's not expensive for me to run a local LLM, I just use the hardware I'm already using for gaming.
Electricity is cheap and most people with a gaming PC probably use more electricity gaming than they would running their own LLM and asking it some questions.I'm also against shoving AI in evening, and not making it Opt-In. I'm also worried about privacy and concentration of power etc.
But just outright saying LLMs are bad is rediculous.
And saying there is no good reason to use them is rediculous. Can we stop doing that.
It's not expensive for me to run a local LLM, I just use the hardware I'm already using for gaming. Electricity is cheap and most people with a gaming PC probably use more electricity gaming than they would running their own LLM and asking it some questions.
I don't personally know the monetary cost of running one of these things locally, and I should be more informed before I make sweeping statements.
I'm also against shoving AI in evening, and not making it Opt-In. I'm also worried about privacy and concentration of power etc.
Then we are on the same page
But just outright saying LLMs are bad is rediculous.
I didn't say that, in fact I said that I didn't have a problem with them as a concept, go back to the previous point for a reason why someone might have instant dislike of "AI"
And saying there is no good reason to use them is rediculous. Can we stop doing that.
I also didn't say that. I just said your examples weren't good uses of it. I happen to think that there are very good applications for this technology, but none of those are publicly available GenAI slop and soulless automation systems/assistants that are really just corporate spyware to collect advertising data.
If you want a "smart home" with voice commands because it make you feel like Tony Stark talking to Jarvis go right ahead, but don't pretend that your locally run LLM is what people are talking about when they level criticism against "AI" (or even if they just say 'AI bad')
-
It's not expensive for me to run a local LLM, I just use the hardware I'm already using for gaming. Electricity is cheap and most people with a gaming PC probably use more electricity gaming than they would running their own LLM and asking it some questions.
I don't personally know the monetary cost of running one of these things locally, and I should be more informed before I make sweeping statements.
I'm also against shoving AI in evening, and not making it Opt-In. I'm also worried about privacy and concentration of power etc.
Then we are on the same page
But just outright saying LLMs are bad is rediculous.
I didn't say that, in fact I said that I didn't have a problem with them as a concept, go back to the previous point for a reason why someone might have instant dislike of "AI"
And saying there is no good reason to use them is rediculous. Can we stop doing that.
I also didn't say that. I just said your examples weren't good uses of it. I happen to think that there are very good applications for this technology, but none of those are publicly available GenAI slop and soulless automation systems/assistants that are really just corporate spyware to collect advertising data.
If you want a "smart home" with voice commands because it make you feel like Tony Stark talking to Jarvis go right ahead, but don't pretend that your locally run LLM is what people are talking about when they level criticism against "AI" (or even if they just say 'AI bad')
You didn't say that no, but people here do say those things.
It's basically how this thread started.
I'm on the same page with a lot of the hate for AI and fears of it, but let's not pretend it's just all bad.
-
"B-But you don't understand, AI DESTROYS le epic self employed artists and their bottom line! Art is a sacred thing that we all do for fun and not for work, therefore AI that automates the process is EVIL!"
- Actual thought process of some people
AI does do this to a subsection. Claiming that everyone is overreacting is just as stupid and lacks the same amount of nuance as claiming AI is going to ruin all self employed artists.
Also this ignores AI companies stealing blatnatly copyrighted material to feed their AI. As an artist I rather not have some randoms steal my stuff so some mid-tier corporation can generate their logos and advertisements without paying for it
-
Why is the other arrow also pointing up?
Because I used AI slop to create this shitpost lol.
So naturally it would make mistake.There are other mistakes in the image too
-
Because I used AI slop to create this shitpost lol.
So naturally it would make mistake.There are other mistakes in the image too
You used AI to make a stickfigure comic? Damn.
-
You used AI to make a stickfigure comic? Damn.
I mostly used it for irony, this is a shitpost after all and to make the orange arrow blue.
But it messed some other things up along the way.
Happy accidents -
AI does do this to a subsection. Claiming that everyone is overreacting is just as stupid and lacks the same amount of nuance as claiming AI is going to ruin all self employed artists.
Also this ignores AI companies stealing blatnatly copyrighted material to feed their AI. As an artist I rather not have some randoms steal my stuff so some mid-tier corporation can generate their logos and advertisements without paying for it
Not claiming that everyone is overreacting, but how stupid a lot of anti-AI arguments are. Artists drawing art for a living gets painted not as a job, but as some sort of a fun recreational activity ignoring that artists have to do commissions or draw whatever's popular with their fan base that pays their bills via patreon, which in other words is the process of commodifying oneself aka work.
Also this ignores AI companies stealing blatnatly copyrighted material to feed their AI.
Not saying that you're necessarily one of those people, but this argument often pops up in leftist spaces who previously were anti-IP, which is a bit hypocritical. One moment people are against intellectual property, calling it abusable, restrictive, etc, but once small artists start getting attacked then the concept has to be defended.
As an artist
womp womp you'll have to get a real job now /s
-
Lots of AI is technologically interesting and has tons of potential, but this kind of chatbot and image/video generation stuff we got now is just dumb.
wrote last edited by [email protected]I firmly believe we won't get most of the interesting, "good" AI until after this current AI bubble bursts and goes down in flames. Once AI hardware is cheap interesting people will use it to make cool things. But right now, the big players in the space are drowning out anyone who might do real AI work that has potential, by throwing more and more hardware and money at LLMs and generative AI models because they don't understand the technology and see it as a way to get rich and powerful quickly.
-
You didn't say that no, but people here do say those things.
It's basically how this thread started.
I'm on the same page with a lot of the hate for AI and fears of it, but let's not pretend it's just all bad.
Just because it isn't all bad doesn't mean that a significant portion of it is in fact, bad.
-
You mean it’s going to outsource the labour to children in third world countries?
More or less
-
i’m pro-AI (with huuuuge caveats) but i disagree with this… AI reduces certain jobs in a similar way, but it also enables large scale manipulation and fucks with our thought processes on a large scale
i’d say it’s like if a mechanised weaving loom also invented the concept of disinformation and propaganda
.. but also, mechanised weaving loom effected a single industry: modern ML has the potential to effect the large majority of people: it’s on a different scale than the disruption of the textile industry
Agree it's on a different scale (everything is relative to 200 years ago).
One of the main "benefits" of mechanised factory machinery in the early 1800s was that shifted the demand side of labour, such that capitalists had far more control over it. I reckon that counts as a kind of large scale manipulation (but yeah, probably not as pervasive of other domains of life).
-
This post did not contain any content.
True. Now shut up and take my upvote! Jo need for arguments; all has already been said.
-
I'll answer. Because some people see these systems as "good" regardless of political affiliation and want them furthered and see any cost as worth it. If an anarchist / communist sees these systems in a positive light, then they will absolutely try and use them at scale. These people absolutely exist and you could find many examples of them on Lemmy. Try DB0.
And the point of anarchist or actual communist systems is that such scale would be miniscule. Not massive national or unanswerable state scales.
And yes, I'm an anarchist. I know DB0 and their instance and generally agree with their stance - because it would allow any one of us to effectively advocate against it if we desired to.
There would be no tech broligarchy forcing things on anyone. They'd likely all be hanged long ago. And no one would miss them as they provide nothing of real value anyway.
-
This echo chamber isn't ready for this logical discussion yet unfortunately lol
When someone disagrees with me - echo chamber.
When someone agrees with me - logical discussion.
-
This is valid to all data centers serving all websites. Your take is a criticism of unregulated capitalism, not AI.
Beef farming is a far far far more impactful discussion, yet here we are.
Ai takes far more power to serve a single request than a website does though.
And remember, AI requires those websites too, for training data.
So it's not just more power hungry, it also has thw initial power consumption added on top
-
A hammer doesn't consume exorbitant amounts of power and water.
What about self hosting?
I can run a local GenAI on my gaming PC with relative ease. This isn't consuming mass amounts of power. -
AI uses 1/1000 the power of a microwave.
Are you really sure you aren't the one being fed lies by con men?
wrote last edited by [email protected]What? Elon Musk’s xAI data center in Tennessee (when fully expanded & operational) will need 2 GW of energy. That’s as much as some entire cities use in a year.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Wow i'm sure this comment section is full of respectful and constructive discussion /s. Lemme go pop some popcorn.
-
Literally this post lol
Doh. I'm always sorted to new, so things don't have this many votes. I should revisit every so often
-
And the point of anarchist or actual communist systems is that such scale would be miniscule. Not massive national or unanswerable state scales.
And yes, I'm an anarchist. I know DB0 and their instance and generally agree with their stance - because it would allow any one of us to effectively advocate against it if we desired to.
There would be no tech broligarchy forcing things on anyone. They'd likely all be hanged long ago. And no one would miss them as they provide nothing of real value anyway.
DB0 has a rather famous record of banning users who do not agree with AI. See [email protected] or others for many threads complaining about it.
You have no way of knowing what the scale would be as it's all a thought experiment, however, so let's play at that. if you see AI as a nearly universal good and want to encourage people to use it, why not incorporate it into things? Why not foist it into the state OS or whatever?
Buuuuut... keep in mind that in previous Communist regimes (even if you disagree that they were "real" Communists), what the state says will apply. If the state is actively pro-AI, then by default, you are using it. Are you too good to use what your brothers and sisters have said is good and will definitely 100% save labour? Are you wasteful, Comrade? Why do you hate your country?
