Rayquetzalcoatl

Re your last point, I’m a full time web developer and while I’m not building entire games or whatever, I am currently working on a fairly complex and involved data migration project. My boss has demanded I do the whole thing with AI and don’t write code.

Thus far, it’s been incredibly frustrating to get it to do what I need it to do without having the chatbot change tonnes of tiny things or assume and hallucinate stuff that simply shouldn’t be there. Beyond those time-wasting frustrations, the fact that I’m not getting hands-on means my mental model of how the data is translating from one system to another is muddy. It’s not as clear as it would be were I building this thing myself. Specifically, because I’m not building it myself, I’m not running into edge cases personally and unpicking the knots of the current system.

There’s no intentionality in what chatbots generate, by definition. They have no intention, they’re not alive, they can’t think. They don’t understand things.

I’m sorry but I’m sort of done with this topic. I don’t like Generative AI, I think it’s disingenuous, lazy, furthering the commodification of art and creativity, and damaging our abilities to think critically. However, I do understand that some people have found it helpful in some contexts, and other people like to play with it. Thanks for the chat. 👍

I was responding to your comment about consumers not being able to tell if Generative AI has been used. I can’t tell the difference between battery farmed eggs and free range ones, but I still avoid eggs that aren’t free range. That doesn’t seem like I’ve lost track of the point, to me.

I then expanded what I was saying, by explaining that I don’t agree with battery farming, which is why I avoid eggs produced that way, despite not being able to actually tell if an egg is free range or battery farmed. This relates to the point about Generative AI use because I also don’t agree with using Generative AI in art and media, and might or might not be able to tell if it’s used.

To respond to your latest comment about my actions and beliefs being irrelevant because my not supporting something I disagree with won’t stop it happening; you’re right. Hens are still battery farmed. As much as I wish it wouldn’t happen, it does. Does that make me sticking by my own morals and feelings futile or irrelevant? I don’t think so.

As for the objections I have with Generative AI, there are a few: I think it’s inauthentic. I want to experience art that was made with intention. I want to see what people are capable of making, and how people tell stories. We’re a storytelling species, I think it’s really important for us. I feel like I’ve been lied to when art is generated by an unthinking machine and then presented as though it was made by a human.

For me, art is a connection between me and the artist. If somebody writes a sad song, and plays it, then I get to experience and understand their feelings in that moment. It’s a communication. I feel something, and they’ve given that to me. If a chatbot did it… Well nobody communicated anything. It’s a lie. It basically catfished my emotions.

There are other objections, too; the plagiarism of actual human work without recompense. The fact that these chatbots are making people mentally unstable, the fact that these chatbots only exist to enrich the already wealthy. The fact that all of this is being sold to us as some way to remove effort from our lives, even the fun parts of our lives. I think effort and hard work are their own reward a lot of the time, and I hate to see laziness championed because it leads to uninteresting and lame shit.

Sorry, that was a long one, and I’ll cut it off here before it gets any longer 😂

I can’t taste the difference between eggs from battery farmed hens and free range ones. I still try to avoid battery farmed eggs.

You can call me a luddite, and you’re totally welcome to your opinions about the ethics of Generative AI usage in media, art, and products that you buy or enjoy. You don’t need me to tell you that.

I am also welcome to my opinions about the ethics of Generative AI usage.

I, personally, do not like it. I, personally, will not knowingly purchase art, media, or products that use it. It’s that simple.

I have to take the word of the company or creator I’m buying a product from if they say they haven’t used AI, but I can take that word in context. Do I feel like this company has a bad reputation of lying to customers? Do I feel like I can see signs of Generative AI? Do I, ultimately, trust that word?

I don’t have to buy big mainstream video games if I want to avoid Generative AI. As it happens, I’ve not long since sold my PS5 and all my games. I have a PS2 and a small collection of older games. I rarely use it.

I back my own ethics. ✌️

I feel we’re moving away from what I understood your point to be: the public has to get comfortable with Generative AI being used in media and products.

I don’t agree with that point.

It isn’t a problem for consumers to make decisions about what they want to support. Those decisions might not line up with your beliefs, but people can still make choices about what they do or don’t support.

If you don’t personally have a problem with GenAI, that’s fine. Nobody else has to accept it or like it for themselves though.

Damn, none of your posts are funny

Oh go away

Just a heads up for anybody seeing this: not only is this disinformation program obviously a bad idea that will serve only to muddy the waters, but this guy loves AI and is presumably using it to build the whole thing. What a fucking mess.

Keep Lemmy Weird ✊

Ugh yet another Lemmy user desperate to make the LLMs like them. Go chat with your chatbot friends and leave humans alone mate.

That feels a bit dangerous to me, sincerely. Like, what if the government mod of a country decides LGBTQ stuff is blacklisted? How do users protest the legislative blacklist? I guess just switch instance?

No idea honestly mate, but what I meant when I brought up the illegality was really that it’s usually very disturbing content, which mods catch and remove before loads of people have to see it.

If it’s a new account posting that stuff, I don’t know how the system we’re discussing would prevent loads of users having to see it - altho I guess if those blacklists of users were collaborative and the person or team whose list you’ve “subscribed” to catch it, maybe that solves the issue?

Ah yeah I hadn’t thought about legal authorities. I guess that would entail local police forces monitoring Lemmy and blacklisting and subsequently investigating specific users or bots once they post something illegal, which seems not so feasible sadly. But, definitely up for a more democratised system of modding generally!

Oh, that’s an interesting idea. It’s more nuanced than just relying on upvotes, and sort of democratises the role of moderator! I was thinking maybe reporting would come into it somewhere but I see that the idea you’re describing has more depth than I was picturing. I’d be up for using a system like that, I think!

Re this, though:

It could also be dictated to you, in the case of legally forbidden stuff.

Is that just admins? Does that decision sort of shift mod responsibility upwards, leaving a good majority of decisions in the hands of the public but ultimately leaving a few powerful people with more global “modding” capability still? Not trying to nitpick or be antagonistic, this sounds like a cool system to use, I’m just trying to understand

Voting could replace mods in some ways, but in others it would be less effective (I know, not all mods are effective).

For instance, combatting spam; more users would have to see the spam and downvote it to have it removed (presumably in this system, a post could be removed when it reaches a certain downvote threshold? Not sure how else it would replace mods).

Additionally, content moderators and admins do actually do at least one other good thing; they look at and remove illegal or seriously upsetting material. Unfortunately, Lemmy has had several issues with csam being posted by presumably bots – good, active content moderators remove this as quickly as possible, protecting more of the users on their instances than a downvote threshold.

Outside of having some sort of threshold, I’m not sure I have a good picture of how downvotes could replace mods? Human oversight is really key to a lot of accurate and effective decision making; I’m sure we’ve all dealt with fully automated systems and know the pain of that.

I think it is important to recognise people as people. I’m not making excuses for intentionally malicious wealthy or powerful people – but the wealth or power itself isn’t the whole problem (although the various systems that perpetuate and enable certain wealthy or powerful people are problematic of course), and we shouldn’t give these adults that as an excuse.

They’re wealthy, yes. They’re also human beings who choose to be cruel, callous, selfish, uncaring arseholes.

They’re powerful, yes. They’re also adults who know what they’re doing and consistently make the decision to harm people with their choices.

Netanyahu’s political power wouldn’t be as much of a problem in and of itself if he wasn’t choosing to enact a genocide. Murdoch’s wealth wouldn’t be as much of a problem in and of itself if he didn’t choose to use it to buy media outlets and push right-wing lies to millions.

No excuses for cruelty; the money and power didn’t “corrupt” these people, because we don’t live in a fantasy world where money and power are magic cursed items. These people intentionally decided to be cruel.

THANK YOU FOR POSTING THIS ROBOT GRUEL MY ROBOT FRIEND 🤖🤖

Please don’t post spam

Certainly not in any big budget mainstream movie there won’t be, because the LLMs used to generate script prompts for the LLMs used to generate visuals and audio clips wouldn’t understand why a human using an AI to fake a human interaction because they’re soul-crushingly lonely would be sad.

Honestly, it might even be generated as a “happy” scene, to show a “normal” life in the future as product placement for the AI companies as they try to exploit fomo to dig their way out of their inevitable fifty trillion dollar income deficits

Wow, I’m genuinely not excited for or interested in the future at all. Oh.

I wonder if they’ve figured out that because they just release essentially the same game every year (for this franchise and other sports franchises like FIFA) with different content, it’ll be cheaper for them to just basically sell a patch?

Just read the article to confirm - yup, it’s a paid “expansion”. God, that’s so funny.