ffs, just publish an article with a single clownemoji for the same effect.
givesomefucks@lemmy.world
on 06 Aug 21:43
collapse
The big corporations desperately want AI to be popular because they’ve thrown literally insane amounts of money at it and still don’t know how to monetize it.
There’s going to be a huge push to make it seem like everyone loves it and it’s weird not to use it constantly
It’s going to go horribly and come off like that “fellow kids” meme, exactly like this headline
They do know how to monetize it. API access generated $1Billion in 2023. There’s also huge R&D potential in fields like genetic research and medicine.
Profitability is another question though. Likely we’re waiting for advances in cold fusion or late stage renewable development for energy costs to go down enough.
I know, I regularly sleep with one of the researchers involved with several similar pojects (aren’t I cool). Fascinating stuff though! Very much not comparable to commercial LLMs, though.
givesomefucks@lemmy.world
on 06 Aug 22:43
nextcollapse
People pay for the “premium” because they believe the makers who said it can increase their profitability and make them money.
My employer keeps trying to shove it down our throats too.
They’re desperate to find anyway to make it reduce work, be cause they’ve already paid for it under the assumption it would let them cut staffing
Now they’re finding out they got swindled, do you think they’ll re-up on AI?
The AI companies offloaded how to monetize it to consumers and scared them into being left behind unless they discovered how to use it.
As much as I hate AI… I think I hate the people who hate AI more lol
zildjiandrummer1@lemmy.world
on 06 Aug 22:45
nextcollapse
AI in this form has been used for like 15 years, to generate trillions of dollars worth of value. I think you’re just talking specifically about ChatGPT and consumer-facing LLMs.
givesomefucks@lemmy.world
on 06 Aug 22:48
collapse
AI in this form has been used for like 15 years, to generate trillions of dollars worth of value
Suuuuuuuuuuure it has…
zildjiandrummer1@lemmy.world
on 06 Aug 23:09
nextcollapse
lol ok. I’ve literally done it. Please, go enlighten yourself on google.
Ooh, print would be amazing. $30 for the softcover, wonder about shipping though…
I have to believe you’re underestimating how recognizable TOE is.
Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world
on 09 Aug 06:26
collapse
It’s a hard one to gauge for me. I’m pretty sure I found it via stumbleupon back when that was really great. I read the whole thing in close to one go, and I never hear anyone else talk about it.
Reverendender@sh.itjust.works
on 07 Aug 02:30
nextcollapse
It’s like taking the last syllable of the name of the hotel and tacking it onto every scandal, because you didn’t understand that it’s part of the name of a hotel, and not some sort of indicator of scandal.
The Germans are probably upset with this comparison
What for a nonsense. Do these other countries not sort their waste or what?Do they not know about efficiency?Next thing you’re going to tell me they don’t sort their white, green and brown glass separately.
There literally is. It’s a mentality that prevents vaccine adoption rates and such. That said, being slow to adopt a technology like Boomers to the Internet is okay. Not adopting a technology because it has no inherent value and is being foisted on us by the ruling class is solid bro behavior.
sulfidedisburseangledafternoontipper@piefed.blahaj.zone
on 06 Aug 21:59
nextcollapse
Tell me you don't know who the Luddites were without telling me you don't know who the Luddites were.
Oh I didn’t realize that everyone uses the term literally. I thought it had expanded to mean a general lack of adoption of change. My bad I guess.
captainlezbian@lemmy.world
on 06 Aug 22:21
collapse
The luddites were skilled labor rioting against capital using machines to replace them with unskilled low wage labor
givesomefucks@lemmy.world
on 06 Aug 22:14
nextcollapse
It was always about worker’s rights anyways:
Malcolm L. Thomas argued in his 1970 history The Luddites that machine-breaking was one of the very few tactics that workers could use to increase pressure on employers, undermine lower-paid competing workers, and create solidarity among workers. “These attacks on machines did not imply any necessary hostility to machinery as such; machinery was just a conveniently exposed target against which an attack could be made.”[10] Historian Eric Hobsbawm has called their machine wrecking “collective bargaining by riot”, which had been a tactic used in Britain since the Restoration because manufactories were scattered throughout the country, and that made it impractical to hold large-scale strikes.[13][14] An agricultural variant of Luddism occurred during the widespread Swing Riots of 1830 in southern and eastern England, centring on breaking threshing machines.[15]
It was about making sure that as mechanization resulted in a lower need for labor, that workers compensation remained steady, and they worked less hours.
People hating luddites is just the result of centuries old propaganda from the wealthy
When the technology really gets beyond human comprehension and people are just guessing and throwing shit at the wall (or billions and billions of dollars), I think it's a sensible position to be a luddite.
homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world
on 06 Aug 21:56
nextcollapse
It’s quite common for me to be annoyed, angry, or upset at a headline writer. Then there’s the feeling I got reading “Meet the AI vegans.”
Whole new level.
humble_boatsman@sh.itjust.works
on 06 Aug 22:06
nextcollapse
Its so wacky out there. When I read something like this I’m sure its The Onion. And its not. Then I read a headline about US politics and its totally believable , alas its The Onion.
You’d be surprised how much more serene your headspace can become if you stop expecting anything beyond stupidity, incompetence and negligence as the default human behavior.
doctortofu@piefed.social
on 06 Aug 23:03
nextcollapse
That's because the author seems to be a journalism vegan, writing vegan and self-awareness vegan.
I installed it locally on my computer to help me with resolving some coding issues if I’m stuck, write cover letters for jobs, and help me organize ppt decks. No information is shared, I’m only using local computing resources, and I’m not propping up a failing business model.
ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net
on 07 Aug 06:56
collapse
DrFistington@lemmy.world
on 06 Aug 22:45
nextcollapse
Stupid title, but in all honesty, now would be the time to create a new religion where there are restrictions on hyper modern things like AI, robotics, etc.
peoplebeproblems@midwest.social
on 07 Aug 03:23
collapse
We must not create a machine to counterfeit human thinking. That could be the most important phrase in the entire thing.
Almost like there might already be a text or novels out there that warn on the dangers of mankind’s hubris.
ileftreddit@piefed.social
on 06 Aug 22:46
nextcollapse
You're not wrong. I am skeptical of AI, and I worry if that makes me a Luddite. I think refusing to use it for anything probably does qualify one as a Luddite. Using it for limited purpose with oversight is the correct approach.
Get out of here with your nuanced take. This is Lemmy, we hate AI it uses up 1bazinga gigalitres of water each time you look at it.
Now excuse me while I go play some video games and search Google, those things use zero electricity.
petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 08 Aug 01:16
collapse
I sense jealousy in this one.
Ashelyn@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 07 Aug 02:42
nextcollapse
I think it depends on the reason you do not use it. The Luddites were primarily frustrated over automation displacing their high-skill job with low-skilled ones that produced worse quality goods. It’s a 2 for 1: we are losing the jobs we need to survive, but also we lose the personal touch from the work of artisans + lose appreciation for their talent.
I am not carte blanche against AI as a concept, but it really does seem like a technology that makes interactions worse quality, more depersonalized, and on top of that it has a horrible externalized environmental cost which benefits nobody in the long run.
Addendum: I believe technology has the power to be liberating when it provides for all of us, and oppressive when it concentrates wealth+power into the hands of moguls and tyrants.
peoplebeproblems@midwest.social
on 07 Aug 03:18
collapse
I don’t. If it makes me a Luddite, I’m a Luddite.
What doesn’t change is that this is a train heading toward a derailment at highspeed while on fire.
Just today I had to walk through why GitHub copilot should not be used for security purposes. I explicitly told the engineer that a constructed url would be detected as a potential XSS vector by our vulnerability scans. They implemented several things, most of which did nothing. Finally, I grabbed the documentation on how to fix it, gave them the line number, gave them the function, and let them build and test it. It ran through the scans and of course it passed.
I get the desire from leadership. I really do. But I’m more interested in our products not costing us more, especially when the LLMs are going to fail the economy on a wide scale.
salacious_coaster@infosec.pub
on 06 Aug 23:39
collapse
There it is. The stupidest headline I’ve read all week.
inb4_FoundTheVegan@lemmy.world
on 06 Aug 22:57
nextcollapse
HA!
I feel like I should be annoyed at the headline, but honestly it’s clever. Veganism isn’t just a diet, but an ethical framework on minimizing harm so this fits all three aspects in the articles.
I support artists who had their work stolen as part of dataset, it’s largely the same reason I don’t eat animals, it’s all about consent. Being harmed without consent is always wrong.
Likewise the environmental footprint of meat and AI are massive and unnecessary. The carbon footprint between meat and plant protein is massive, just like the difference between building more data centers and supporting existing artists.
AI is bad for your mental health, we don’t really have complete research on what exactly AI does to our brains but I’ve seen enough people thinking they “unlocked sentience”, became “digital gods” and started AI “relationships” to steer clear for my own protection. Not dissimilar to the studies that show a plant based diet is better for your heart and immune system. I’d still be eating plants even if it were bad for my health, I care more about the ethical side, but existing research very much shows it as a net positive.
Now we wait for article “meet genocide vegans: people who are against Israel’s genocide against Palestinians based on ethical reasons”
Zephorah@discuss.online
on 06 Aug 23:05
nextcollapse
What a terrible choice of words. They’re immediately assigning political placement and party to the idea of avoiding AI use instead of appealing to all of humanity on this topic.
Plus, it’s a silly metaphor.
zarkanian@sh.itjust.works
on 08 Aug 23:39
collapse
Which is the vegan party?
candyman337@lemmy.world
on 06 Aug 23:08
nextcollapse
How about we don’t call that being an AI vegan and just call it a moral objection. That’s fucking ridiculous, that’s a term designed to make not using AI for that reason look bad and preachy.
ABetterTomorrow@sh.itjust.works
on 06 Aug 23:11
nextcollapse
People who care*
capuccino@lemmy.world
on 06 Aug 23:43
nextcollapse
It’s honestly not even the worst way I’ve even seen it used.
I used to watch some League of Legends (I know, I know) streams from time to time, and there’s a meta where your mid laner, who is supposed to be a strong carry, gives up all their farm to the roaming jungler roll so they become the super-carry.
In any case this somehow got termed to be the “vegan mid” strategy. Ugh. Veganism is when you starve, apparently.
I can’t say I’m a (normal) vegan, but I’m definitely an AI vegan. I was turned off by the ethical considerations, and the few “bites” I have tried leave a bad taste in my mouth. I avoid using it because much of the training data was (and is) stolen, the power costs are far too high compared to the utility, and it’s basically worthless to me, having a screwed up response to nearly every prompt I tried.
I’ve stood by while my colleagues have used it. I ask them a question they might know, just to check before I start spending time reading documentation. They’ll go “just ask Bing!” (Company endorsed AI.)
They’ll keep prompting and prompting and discussing the results, meanwhile I just go directly to the docs and find the information right there written on the screen.
I won’t subject myself to the dumbification. I don’t even use copilot to auto-complete as much as a for loop. I know how it’s written, damnit.
Bennyboybumberchums@lemmy.world
on 07 Aug 02:12
nextcollapse
I can not wait, until the time of the perpetually seeking attention moron ends. Its always something with these fucking people. If you dont wanna use AI, just dont use it. Theres no fucking gun to your head. And we dont need to know youre not using, much less, find out youve got a dumb fucking name for yourselves.
Ashelyn@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 07 Aug 02:31
nextcollapse
If it gets you talking about it, even in the context of telling them to shut the fuck up, it’s working :)
“Theres no fucking gun to your head.”
Bosses: 🦜🤖 🟰💹, 👨💼🔫🤓
CarrmynCarnage@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 07 Aug 04:33
collapse
Not just bosses. Tech companies have leveraged a good portion of the world’s economy on AI, and are shoveling money directly into the ovens to shove it down our throats.
No one asked for any of this. Not a goddamn soul asked for AI order takers at McDonald’s. Because it’s not about choice. The choice to abstain is going to get more and more painful to make as time goes on. By design.
Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works
on 07 Aug 02:12
nextcollapse
Can you pick them out if crowd by their furled brows?
Just hold up a picture, they’ll show up to tell you why they think it’s generated
MyOpinion@lemmy.today
on 07 Aug 02:31
nextcollapse
I try not to use AI at all. I am not missing out on anything.
atticus88th@lemmy.world
on 07 Aug 02:44
nextcollapse
Just wait until you have an employer tell you that you need to write up a summary of how you used AI in your every day activities to save 25% of your day to work on other activities.
You’ll use AI to write the summary and then soon discover that your employer is a tool and is paying more than double your salary to keep that AI around to do literally nothinf 98% of the time it exists.
GnuLinuxDude@lemmy.ml
on 07 Aug 03:01
nextcollapse
I also try, but it is invoked on my behalf. For instance, at work if I make a pull request now multiple AI bots are summoned to give an analysis of my code changes. It’s extremely verbose and annoying, and I think basically nobody reads it because all it does is just spam the comments section with way too much text.
I vehemently hate OpenAI, ChatGPT, et al. At least it’s funny when it summarizes my changes as significant improvements that improve code maintainability. I guess getting glazed by the bot in a way my manager can see is helpful to my career? Though honestly he probably also doesn’t read that shit. So glad all this energy is wasted for nothing.
I hate this attitude from people who don’t even try things before saying they are not missing out. Try AI! You have to experience the head bashing, head scratching time sink, after which you do a manual search anyways. It is a marvellous wonder how bad modern “cutting edge” tech can be.
They may have come to this decision through experience.
Having used it a bit, I find it’s like someone a bit stupid with a lot of time on their hands, but no knowledge, saying “I’ll learn everything you need to know from Google and write you an answer”, just speeded up a lot. And just as frustrating.
uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 07 Aug 02:40
nextcollapse
I’ve never used AI, even when wanting to give it a try. There was either a queue or a fee, or must click-wrap agree to terms and conditions for free two months and I wasn’t going to do those.
I never did an NFT either.
zarkanian@sh.itjust.works
on 08 Aug 23:36
collapse
Eh, you can download and run them locally now, and they don’t even phone home.
auraithx@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 07 Aug 02:48
nextcollapse
Ai vegans are people who only use ai generated porn.
I’m an LLM freegan, I guess. But I’m cutting back too, the usefulness peaked.
rhythmisaprancer@piefed.social
on 07 Aug 03:52
collapse
freegan
If they had come up with something original like that, it would have been better. But creating constructive neologisms takes work, I guess.
interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
on 07 Aug 05:57
collapse
Try if one of the following strikes your fancy
AIniks
NoBots
Cogclean
Algorejects
Synthephobes
I quite like synthephobes !
Synthless
Cogstainers
Analogians
rhythmisaprancer@piefed.social
on 07 Aug 06:12
collapse
I'm not sure if AInik works, wouldn't that mean they are a fan of AI? Also unsure of the synth- options as a friend of synthesizer musicians, but as a non musician maybe I should use that myself 🤔 I can't interpret analogian without help...
But the others sound pretty great! Cogstainers is awesome because it can be reworked into different word types. Verbs, adjectives. Incredible.
interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
on 07 Aug 06:21
collapse
AIniks, it’s something like refusenik, chainik and beatnikm yeah I’m not sure if it’s anti, or pro or something else, it’s also hard to say
I think analogian just sounds like vegan and it’s for people who prefer analog meatbased wetware.
Synth- as in synthetic, against synthetic fakeness
A cogstaining synthless analogian
Synthfree ?
rhythmisaprancer@piefed.social
on 07 Aug 07:45
collapse
analog
Makes more sense now, I only picked up one the first 2/3 and thought of other things 😅
BackgrndNoize@lemmy.world
on 07 Aug 03:58
nextcollapse
Shitty click baity title
CarrmynCarnage@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 07 Aug 04:26
nextcollapse
If anyone says the words “AI Vegan” to my face, I’m throwing shit.
sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
on 07 Aug 06:31
collapse
Make sure to wash your hands after.
ICastFist@programming.dev
on 07 Aug 12:05
collapse
Or use a sling for higher velocity
thisbenzingring@lemmy.sdf.org
on 07 Aug 05:33
nextcollapse
today I was trying to find how to manipulate a trunk on an aruba switch and JFK the internet search results were fucking shit on a platter! I tried to reword it in ways that might give me a better result but it never happened. None of the commands the AI suggested would have worked.
I FUCKING HATE AI results in the web searching tools
interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
on 07 Aug 05:52
collapse
HEre’s a tip, paste the chapter index from the manual in it, ask "which chapter are relevant to " $question
Then paste the chapter it asks, then formulate your question
The AI search result though, useless because they’re contextless, it’s like a car without a steering wheel.
On my list of “dont’s”, inspired by Luke Smith, I do not use AI.
HexesofVexes@lemmy.world
on 07 Aug 06:39
nextcollapse
I applaud folks like this - they make a choice and stick with it. No “I’ll never use AI to generate art but I vibe code to save time” hypocrisy. No “I use it to help me with maths, but I’d never use it to steal artistic work”.
Just straight up “it is an environmental hazard, it is unethical, not engaging”. Should be called “AI Ethicists” rather than “AI Vegans”.
Flagstaff@programming.dev
on 07 Aug 06:58
nextcollapse
Starting it with “AI” is already misleading. Whatever the noun is should be preceded by “Anti-AI.”
HexesofVexes@lemmy.world
on 07 Aug 08:44
nextcollapse
I dunno, the use of AI Ethicist fits as they’re not against the concept of generative AI as a whole, they’re against unethical generative AI (in terms of stolen training data and environmental harm).
If the world transitioned to a post-IP (intellectual property) society (as we need to), with AI eating less power, then AI Ethicists are unlikely to object.
Flagstaff@programming.dev
on 08 Aug 02:37
collapse
Yeah, I too hate those hypcrites who complain about the massive environmental impact of AI, then drive a 10 mile round trip to buy a burger made from a cow raised on soy.
No I'm a meat eater who is anti-car! I'm more getting at how people have latched on to the energy use of AI models without realising the huge energy usage that goes into their daily lives.
HexesofVexes@lemmy.world
on 07 Aug 10:47
nextcollapse
Definitely a good point to raise; thanks for doing so!
Here’s a fun one - where do you stand on those forced to commute dur to housing prices near inner city work (e.g. I live in near poverty paying a mortgage for a small place near where I work due to poor public transport so I can walk to work - how does this figure into the anti-car vision? Is it an employer issue, a government issue, a personal sacrifice, or something else entirely?)
Its an urban planning and transport issue essentially. Medium density housing (think 4-6 story blocks) allows enough people to live in an area that it becomes feasible to have trams/light rail serving that area.
If you’re interested in this topic, I simply must plug the Adam Something YT channel :) He makes funny but also serious videos about urban and transport planning, and whatever new “trains but worse” transport idea techbros came up with this month.
lightsblinken@lemmy.world
on 07 Aug 12:37
collapse
are the two comparable? genuinely asking because i suspect AI usage is an order
of magnitude or so more…
You're right that there's orders of magnitude difference, but its the driving that's far more! One query to a chatGPT type model uses roughly 1Wh of energy, which is about the same as is released in burning one droplet of gasoline.
ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net
on 07 Aug 06:57
nextcollapse
I think some AI use is clearly worth the costs (like helping with scientific research or accessibility), some clearly isn’t (like generating spam), and much falls in a gray area where reasonable people can disagree.
So do I think it’s ethical to use me? In many cases, yes - but I understand why thoughtful people might conclude otherwise, and I don’t think they’re wrong to avoid AI if they’ve weighed the considerations and found the costs too high.
I can only imagine someone came up with AI vegan after they decided to eat steak that evening while thinking they’re the ones who are pressed by vegans…
HertzDentalBar@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 07 Aug 07:24
nextcollapse
AI is the new crypto. It will appear to die off but the aspects that work will be integrated into everything.
audaxdreik@pawb.social
on 07 Aug 08:43
nextcollapse
What aspects of crypto have been integrated into everything?
Search sucks and the AI is faster for tech questions. Try searching a Linux cli question or obscure error. Lots of stuff from over a decade ago that are no longer relevant. And you have to wade through so much to find the right one. Or type in AI wait a minute and get the answer.
davidagain@lemmy.world
on 07 Aug 14:26
nextcollapse
And you have to wade through so much to find the right one. Or type in AI wait a minute and get the answer.
Uhhh, type in AI, wait a minute and get an answer. How are you checking it? rm - f / isn’t the only filesystem footgun.
I’m finding AI to be right roughly only 60% of the time, and it’s as bad and hallucinatory about shell scripts as it is about everything else.
It will happily admit its mistakes and give you another answer when you call it out, but it’s no more likely to be right that time.
You check it by following the link to the webpage where it found your answer and reading that.
AI as a search engine is good, but never blatantly trust any search result they come up with. It is however incredible at wading through the slop that is SEO.
zarkanian@sh.itjust.works
on 08 Aug 23:31
collapse
I’ve had them give me the exact same answer a second time. They politely apologized first, of course, and they were just as confident that it was correct as the first time.
zarkanian@sh.itjust.works
on 08 Aug 23:27
collapse
RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
on 07 Aug 10:21
nextcollapse
Aigen or Aibstenant something for a term. Vegan is not right.
CH3DD4R_G0BL1N@sh.itjust.works
on 07 Aug 10:42
nextcollapse
I’ll just stick with calling myself “old man yelling at clouds” for the double meaning and so I’m not a vegan of any kind, thanks.
carl_dungeon@lemmy.world
on 07 Aug 11:12
nextcollapse
This is someone more obnoxious than ai tech bros
zarkanian@sh.itjust.works
on 08 Aug 23:26
collapse
I think this IS an AI tech bro. Or at least an AI tech bro dick-rider.
abbiistabbii@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 07 Aug 11:33
nextcollapse
Calling them after a maligned (if harmless) group seems like a choice to paint refusing to use AI as being annoying, preachy and scorn-worthy.
They seem very determined to pressure people into using AI regardless of it’s practicality, environmental impact, or anything. Fuck this shit.
mostlikelyaperson@lemmy.world
on 07 Aug 11:41
nextcollapse
There’s been recent pushes in that regard, investment in AI shit has been enormous but the financial payoff for anyone besides hardware manufacturers remains nonexistent. So investors and corporations have recently redoubled their efforts into trying to get everyone to use it in the hopes that this somehow will make them profitable.
TimewornTraveler@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 07 Aug 23:26
collapse
yeah, this is 1000% deliberate manufacturing consent
Itdidnttrickledown@lemmy.world
on 07 Aug 11:53
nextcollapse
I don’t use it because I have no trust in it.
Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works
on 07 Aug 12:24
nextcollapse
Sounds like you are not eating enough small rocks a day. You should eat 1 small rock a day.
Wtf this is the weirdest thing to read while taking a shit in the morning
dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world
on 07 Aug 13:29
collapse
This was an actual response that Google’s stupid Gemini LLM really gave somebody. The notion was lifted from a satirical Onion article which the LLM regurgitated as if it was an established fact.
also because it’s shit, if my memory serves me, I have successfully used AI for a productive task 1 time out of 7 attempts so far… it saved me 5 minutes
Itdidnttrickledown@lemmy.world
on 07 Aug 13:11
collapse
That is part of the trust thing. I spent more time fixing the word salad it spat out than it would have taken to write the document.
Anecdotal of course, but every person I know who claims AI is a huge productivity booster simply trust it blindly.
I can’t even get “Copilot” to return a proper answer from its own meeting transcript… just yesterday there was some confusion about an IP address we exchanged in a past meeting… I asked Copilot to check the transcript and give me the IP of the vendor’s server (which I pointed by name of system and who spoke it in the meeting) and it gave me the IP of MY server, functionally the complete opposite of what I was asking but with full confidence in its answer
Inspiration for creative writing prompts for example. Things that make you double check every word that has been generated or where it doesn’t matter they hallucinate.
lightsblinken@lemmy.world
on 07 Aug 12:35
collapse
so… you’re refusing AI, but you are using AI?
isnt the point of the story that people are not using because ethics? its not a discussion on how good they are, which is somewhat irrelevant.
ICastFist@programming.dev
on 07 Aug 12:39
nextcollapse
No, I didn’t make it up. Although I rather wish I did, because it’s quite catchy, isn’t it?
No, it isn’t, it’s fucking stupid. The author was kind enough to link the source of that shitty idea, and the AI/vegan parallels are, per said article: ethical, environmental and wellness concerns.
Gee wiz, I sure never saw people with those 3 concerns in regards to anything other than veganism!!!
/s
astutemural@midwest.social
on 08 Aug 01:37
collapse
ITT: people really upset at being called ‘vegan’ for some reason.
zarkanian@sh.itjust.works
on 08 Aug 23:22
collapse
It’s pretty clear that the author doesn’t intend it as a compliment.
astutemural@midwest.social
on 09 Aug 00:35
collapse
That sounds like a ‘them’ problem. Veganism is based.
Retro_unlimited@lemmy.world
on 07 Aug 12:47
nextcollapse
I have local self hosted AI that runs in my solar system.
I don’t use AI because it ROTS your brain.
We are not the same.
I don’t use A.I. because I’ve had nothing but negative interactions with A.I. Customer service bots that fail to give adequate responses, unhelpful and incorrect search result summaries, and, “art,” that looks like shit hasn’t made me want to sign up for ChatGPT or Gemini. For most people, this isn’t a moral stance, it’s just that the product isn’t worth paying for. Stop framing people that don’t use A.I. as luddites with an ax to grind just because tech bros spent billions on a product that isn’t good yet.
davidagain@lemmy.world
on 07 Aug 14:14
nextcollapse
It’s fair to say that the environmental and ethical concerns are significant and I wouldn’t look down in anyone refusing to use AI for those reasons. I don’t look down on vegetarians or vegans either - I don’t have to agree with someone’s moral stance or choices to respect them.
Truth is definitely a bit of a blind spot for LLMs.
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
on 07 Aug 14:31
nextcollapse
For most people, this isn’t a moral stance, it’s just that the product isn’t worth paying for.
Wait till you see the price of a burger in another five years.
Electricd@lemmybefree.net
on 08 Aug 08:45
collapse
Yea, it’s often really fucking cheap for the value, just like streaming services to an extent
JuxtaposedJaguar@lemmy.ml
on 07 Aug 15:02
nextcollapse
You only notice AI-generated content when it’s bad/obvious, but you’d never notice the AI-generated content that’s so good it’s indistinguishable from something generated by a human.
I don’t know what percentage of the “good” content we see is AI-generated, but it’s probably more than 0 and will probably go up over time.
BlackRoseAmongThorns@slrpnk.net
on 07 Aug 16:53
nextcollapse
Shit take, the more AI-made media is online, the harder it is for AI developing companies to improve on previous models.
It won’t be indistinguishable from media made with human effort, unless you enjoy wasting your time on cheap uninteresting manmade slop then you won’t be fooled by cheap uninteresting and untrue AI-made slop.
Electricd@lemmybefree.net
on 08 Aug 08:46
collapse
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
BlackRoseAmongThorns@slrpnk.net
on 08 Aug 09:40
collapse
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
Electricd@lemmybefree.net
on 08 Aug 12:27
collapse
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
BlackRoseAmongThorns@slrpnk.net
on 08 Aug 14:27
collapse
AI requires genuine data, period.
Go read about it instead of spewing nonsense.
Electricd@lemmybefree.net
on 08 Aug 17:05
collapse
If they weren’t trained on the same data, it ends up similar
Training inferior models with superior models output can lower the gap between both. It’ll not be optimal by any means and you might fuck its future learning, but it will work to an extent
The data you feed it should be good quality though
zarkanian@sh.itjust.works
on 08 Aug 23:19
collapse
Maybe, but that doesn’t change the fact that it was trained on stolen artwork and is being used to put artists out of work. I think that, and the environmental effect, are better arguments against AI than some subjective statement about whether or not it’s good.
Electricd@lemmybefree.net
on 08 Aug 08:44
collapse
Customer service AI sucks, I think we can all agree to this
But if you really believe that ChatGPT and Gemini is mainly for generating art, then you’re completely wrong
NoodlePoint@lemmy.world
on 07 Aug 13:32
nextcollapse
I refuse ever touching an AI-driven app or feature, having seen too much slop.
I’d rather call myself a rejectionist than something called fancy.
My employer enabled it on my laptop. It introduced itself to me and asked how it could be helpful. I asked it how to disable it. It responded HAL style.
The irony of environmental activists using the word “veganism” while not being vegan 😒 (being vegan is one of the most significant reduction to greenhouse emissions that is within your personal choice)
drspawndisaster@sh.itjust.works
on 07 Aug 14:38
nextcollapse
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
on 07 Aug 14:40
nextcollapse
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.
So just the “Appeal to futility” logical fallacy? I’m convinced!
Every change starts somewhere. Yes, 0.001% of the population can be vegan and it most likely won’t save a single slaughterhouse animal. But 1%? That’s already significant enough to make at least some change, and 10%? That’s already setting market trends and modifying industries, 50%?
You get my point. You joining the current vegan population is significant! The vegan population is estimated to be 9% in india and mexico, 5% in Israel, 2% in the UK, 1.5% in the US, and estimated to be a total of 1%-3% of the global population. This is a movement that has probably saved more lives and more gas emissions than many others have.
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
on 07 Aug 16:09
collapse
So just the “Appeal to futility” logical fallacy?
At some point, you have to recognize factory farming as a public policy decision rather than a retail choice. And the response has to be organized and political, not individualistic and consumerist.
You joining the current vegan population is significant!
It’s significant for popular politics, sure. But a vegan community that satisfies itself with attaching blinders when they pass through the Bad Foods aisle at the grocery store is going to end up in the same place as the climate activist who only owns a bike.
The vegan population is estimated to be 9% in india and mexico, 5% in Israel, 2% in the UK, 1.5% in the US
The difference between the US and India is that if you go around trying to butcher cows in particularly devote areas of India, you’re subject to serious political reprisals. In the US, it’s practically a sacrament to eat burger.
At some point, you have to recognize factory farming as a public policy decision rather than a retail choice
It is both, and both affect each other. False dichotomy?
a vegan community that satisfies itself with attaching blinders when they pass through the Bad Foods aisle at the grocery store is going to end up in the same place as the climate activist who only owns a bike.
Strawmaning what being a vegan is. It is far from just turning a blind eye.
The difference between the US and India is that if you go around trying to butcher cows in particularly devote areas of India, you’re subject to serious political reprisals.
You know that they eat plenty of other animals right? If you go there, meat and animal products are a very big part of the local food.
I can’t take these arguments seriously.
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
on 07 Aug 18:08
collapse
You know that they eat plenty of other animals right?
Per capita they’re heavily constrained. They have three times the population and one third the land area. They can’t slaughter animals to match US consumption patterns even if they try.
That’s incentivized a culture of veganism as normal and virtuous, as a consequence. And it has allowed the population to expand to 1.3B without experiencing rates of malnutrition common to more rural countries (Kenya, Argentina, and Haiti, for instance) where enormous stretches of land have been dedicated to feedstock.
zarkanian@sh.itjust.works
on 08 Aug 23:11
collapse
And the response has to be organized and political, not individualistic and consumerist.
Right. This isn’t an argument against veganism; it’s an argument for vegans getting organized.
DarthFrodo@lemmy.world
on 07 Aug 16:49
nextcollapse
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
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
on 08 Aug 13:56
collapse
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.
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.
zarkanian@sh.itjust.works
on 08 Aug 23:06
collapse
If the human you’re fucking consented, then consuming their fluids is vegan. Hell if they consent, eating them would be vegan too.
Animals do not consent to having fluids extracted or their lives taken and flesh consumed. Animal agriculture keeps animals in filthy, torturous conditions too, which no animal would ever consent to either.
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world
on 07 Aug 19:18
collapse
I had a fish that died by suicide. We didn’t eat it, but arguably
It was kept in captivity by you though, which is not it’s natural habitat so any choices it made were, arguably, under duress.
If you lived by a creek and regularly recognised a fish swimming by, and one day this fish killed itself in front of you- you still shouldn’t eat it as fish contain a lot of parasites and there’s very likely also something toxic in the water causing the fish to harm itself this way.
But yeah, sure, hypothetically: if for a year or so you knew a wild fish that lived in an unpolluted and ecologically healthy body of water, and one day this fish chose to kill itself in front of you. You could, if you really wanted to eat a suicidal fish, eat the fish and say it was vegan because the only harm that came to the fish was through the un-coerced choices of said suicidal fish.
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world
on 07 Aug 19:16
collapse
Disagreed. I am an animal.
magnus919@lemmy.brandyapple.com
on 09 Aug 11:25
collapse
It only counts when it’s voluntary, tho.
JuxtaposedJaguar@lemmy.ml
on 07 Aug 15:03
nextcollapse
I mean, abstaining from animal products makes someone a vegan, right? If you abstain from AI products then it would follow that you’re an “AI vegan”.
normalexit@lemmy.world
on 07 Aug 15:17
nextcollapse
It follows, but it is also feels like click bait.
A definition of vegan is:
A vegetarian who eats plant products only, especially one who uses no products derived from animals, as fur or leather.
There is an environmental parallel, and it made me read the article to see what they were on about – so I guess it worked.
To be clear, I am very pro environment (I live in it); I just feel like this is crossing the streams of related, but completely different movements, isn’t particularly helpful.
Abstaining from animal products is just vegetarian. Veganism requires an extremely strict adherence to a very specific set of rules concerning animals.
JuxtaposedJaguar@lemmy.ml
on 07 Aug 20:40
collapse
Vegetarians can eat cheese, which is an animal product.
Hellahunter@lemmy.world
on 07 Aug 16:55
nextcollapse
Awe so the article author has a vendetta against vegans got it.
It’s like how they put the word gate after something to say that it is a scandal involving the former word.
Somesort of political scandal involving road maintenance? Oh yes well that’s roadgate then. Even though the Watergate scandal was in fact it scandal in the watergate hotel, rather than a scandal about water.
Guys it’s fine, you’re overreacting. I only use local instances of AI and I always ask it for consent before using it to deepfake porn of my favorite celebrities in their debut roles. You vegans are overreacting and taking it too far. Humanity has been using AI for like 6 months now and our bodies aren’t biologically ready to go back to writing our own homework. You really need to check your privilege; we can’t all afford fancy tools like GIMP to make our own art.
Deflated0ne@lemmy.world
on 07 Aug 15:13
nextcollapse
Hi. That’s me.
If at any point I’m required to use it for a job I’ll learn. Till then I can do my own googling, reading, math, etc.
I just don’t need it. And the push to put it in literally everything makes me not want it at all. Corps don’t do good things. Always seeking a rent. Always digging for a profit. And always at our expense.
Deflated0ne@lemmy.world
on 07 Aug 15:16
nextcollapse
The only AI I’d ever want is something like a VI from Mass Effect. Runs locally and harvests absolutely zero data.
UnfortunateShort@lemmy.world
on 07 Aug 16:37
collapse
I wouldn’t mind a Geth or two, for jolly cooperation
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world
on 07 Aug 19:20
collapse
Also for destroying the occasional organics, as a little treat
Corelli_III@midwest.social
on 07 Aug 15:21
nextcollapse
propaganda like this is so fucking sad
colonizers don’t have anything to value in their culture and they don’t have a future so they want to rip on people who aren’t buying their garbage
explodicle@sh.itjust.works
on 07 Aug 15:30
nextcollapse
Reading this thread, I wonder if the term is intended to divide a largely environmentalist opposition.
Makes “nocoiner” seem tame by comparison.
SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world
on 07 Aug 15:57
collapse
There’s a huge push right now to salvage the AI hype bubble as people realize the tech can’t live up to the promises. They are also trying to prevent regulation.
This includes the pushes to humanize the tool, like saying it deserves rights or that there may be some kind of racism against the tool.
They’re trying to pretend it’s real AI rather than extremely complicated text prediction. Hell, the less knowledgeable among them might even believe it. LLMs are a sort of language pareidolia.
zarkanian@sh.itjust.works
on 08 Aug 22:57
collapse
Hell, the less knowledgeable among them might even believe it.
What’s weird is that the people who run the fucking companies apparently believe this. Or they’re trying to convince us that they believe this.
zarkanian@sh.itjust.works
on 08 Aug 22:56
collapse
like saying it deserves rights or that there may be some kind of racism against the tool.
Wait, who’s saying this?!
kadaverin0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 07 Aug 16:19
nextcollapse
This is the dumbest shit I’ve ever read. Refusing to submit to corpo ratfuckery isn’t a lifestyle choice. It’s common sense.
Electricd@lemmybefree.net
on 08 Aug 08:42
collapse
They use to mock us with “Luddite” but the Technologists looked into that actual movement (rather than the caricature) and agreed, “yeah sure, like them”. That took the sting out of the pejorative, so they picked another mocked group to connect it with.
Effectively I believe we are. During my MFA I realized we were simply copying as a form of craft. It’s all we do in arts. Any great work feels like just one continuous story retold again and again.
petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 08 Aug 00:54
collapse
The Platonic Ion makes similar cynical claims. The idea that art is mimetic is compelling enough without gen AI.
petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 08 Aug 20:13
collapse
Okay, I feel like we’re doing a motte and bailey here. I’m not arguing that art is never mimetic.
There’s a lot of diversity in the stories we tell. If we were “simply copying as a form of craft,” where is this diversity coming from? Do you mean something different than what I’m interpreting?
Keep in mind, the thing that I am contending with is that the nature of people retelling stories is not unlike a robot that lacks a conscious. I think this is downright silly.
Yup, these things are still garbage for >90% of all applications people are jamming them into. Breathed a sigh of relief when my company CEO said he doesn’t see us using AI for more than can center routing for at least the next several years.
Electricd@lemmybefree.net
on 08 Aug 08:38
collapse
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.
Electricd@lemmybefree.net
on 08 Aug 17:04
collapse
Brave’s AI search results are pretty good
I don’t dislike AI generated videos as long as they are funny with some meta (making fun of the absurdity of what characters do for example - the brainrot potential is unlimited)
stoicmaverick@lemmy.world
on 07 Aug 23:15
nextcollapse
Every last bit of it? What is your stance on use of AI for tasks such as data analysis of massive sets for scientific research, or procedural automation of massive operations?
AI doesn’t exist, machine learning algorithms can be useful and are used with no controversy, generative bullshit is basically useless.
stoicmaverick@lemmy.world
on 08 Aug 00:39
nextcollapse
You’re using a lot of very loosely defined terms with a lot of certainty. Machine learning is AI, we just usually apply it to the more simple versions of it. Where do you personally draw the line? I fully understand the plethora of risks, downsides, and injustices that can potentially be involved in the matter, but I legitimately don’t understand the extremist level hatred that some people express to anything that could hold the title of AI. To me, it parallels with someone saying that they hate ionizing radiation. Frequently, it’s also bad, and your entirely reasonable to try and avoid it on a daily basis, but it also has many uses that are beneficial and life-saving.
Don’t try to argue with the lemmy anti-AI crowd, it’s not worth it.
Electricd@lemmybefree.net
on 08 Aug 08:41
collapse
Same thinking as people who hate crypto for a part of it
They just sound completely dumb, yet it’s the majority of people here
For a place that welcomes people, inclusivity and hate discrimination, there’s a lot of generalization of a lot of topics
Electricd@lemmybefree.net
on 08 Aug 08:39
collapse
That’s… not how it works. ML is AI also…
Don’t talk about things you don’t understand, please, to avoid misinforming other
petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 08 Aug 00:51
collapse
Yes, I am also frequently accosted by Google’s data analysis of massive sets for scientific research. I can’t tell you how many times they’ve forcefully inserted research analysis of large data sets into my search results.
stoicmaverick@lemmy.world
on 08 Aug 05:25
collapse
What?
Electricd@lemmybefree.net
on 08 Aug 08:37
collapse
*because you don’t know how to use it
UltraBlack@lemmy.world
on 07 Aug 22:14
nextcollapse
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
Inkstainthebat@pawb.social
on 07 Aug 22:43
nextcollapse
You’ve probably heard this before but do consider alternatives like Startpage and Qwant. It’s not flawless but I’ve found it’s definitely better.
If you’re willing to pay money then Kagi is a great alternative. They claim they don’t collect or share your data. Though, Kagi isn’t very good for local search results and probably never will be.
JigglySackles@lemmy.world
on 07 Aug 23:48
nextcollapse
Unfortunately, it’s not better and also shows slop
RickyRigatoni@retrolemmy.com
on 08 Aug 00:52
nextcollapse
You can at least turn off its built-in summaries. But some filtering to detect AI generated articles would be nice.
hildegarde@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 08 Aug 02:09
collapse
You can ask it to turn off the summaries. It still shows them but you can ask.
RickyRigatoni@retrolemmy.com
on 08 Aug 12:05
collapse
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.
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.
astutemural@midwest.social
on 08 Aug 01:22
nextcollapse
Just switched to noai.duckduckgo.com. Thanks stranger!
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.
Telemachus93@slrpnk.net
on 08 Aug 09:58
nextcollapse
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.
Goldholz@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 08 Aug 09:26
collapse
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.
They are “journalism vegans”. They are choosing to abstain from actual journalism for clickbaiting, herd mentality, and personal lack of skill reasons.
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.
ICastFist@programming.dev
on 08 Aug 13:10
collapse
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.
I don’t really agree that “everyone knows this” when everyone I know talks about environmentalism almost exclusively in terms of individual impact.
cy_narrator@discuss.tchncs.de
on 08 Aug 01:27
nextcollapse
Thats 99% lemmy users
Electricd@lemmybefree.net
on 08 Aug 08:37
collapse
Less but yea, many are anti AI here
redwattlebird@lemmings.world
on 08 Aug 02:55
nextcollapse
AI vegan is not a thing and shall never be.
The correct term is Technophile. Anyone obsessed with tech would never hand it off to a third party to do when they can go through the joy of learning themselves.
That’s a completely different reason to not use AI.
You’re a technophile - you don’t use AI because you enjoy finding information on your own and learning. Great. That ignores the vast majority of people using AI to write emails/posts (which is not looking up information nor learning anything related to tech).
The people the article is about don’t want to use AI due to environmental reasons - the amounts of water and energy it uses for every prompt is stupid high and they don’t want to contribute to that waste.
finitebanjo@lemmy.world
on 08 Aug 05:23
nextcollapse
AI isn’t the meat, jack. It’s slop.
Kekzkrieger@feddit.org
on 08 Aug 05:28
nextcollapse
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
Whithout a clear definition of intelligence, such a discussion is somewhat pointless. The closest thing I would use to describe artificial “intelligence” is: Mimicking human/natural thought and decision processes, without the necessity of being identical.
Secondly, regarding your first paragraph:
Humans excel at providing wrong information. Sometimes they are right. In that regard there are similarities between an LLM and a human.
By the way: LLMs are part of the field of AI. But AI consists of a plethora of methods and algorithms, where LLMs are just a tiny fraction that is currently very popular.
Hear me out: what i, this is a plot to boost vegan numbers. Given latest stats huge portion of population does not use or see any use in AI - i.e. can be claimed AI vegans so in aggregation reports those could be viewed as a subset of Vegans… resulting in undeniable truth that 90%+ of population are vegan now
aeternum@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 08 Aug 08:14
nextcollapse
I don’t use ai either. But because it’s fuckin stupid. It’s not even ai. It’s a glorified sorting algorithm.
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.
Electricd@lemmybefree.net
on 08 Aug 12:31
nextcollapse
I don’t care about votes. I just hope that people start to comprehend this field a tiny bit better .
Electricd@lemmybefree.net
on 08 Aug 17:13
collapse
They won’t, because their opinion is political and ideological, not technical
princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 08 Aug 14:46
nextcollapse
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.
I was going to wholeheartedly endorse your comment and then you ruin it in the last sentence with
that matches the text comprehension skills of 15 year olds (just an example), then this too is AI.
It feels like you know what you are talking about, but then confuse the successful statistical analysis of text as “comprehension” which is just plain factually wrong.
sad. so close though.
Electricd@lemmybefree.net
on 08 Aug 08:35
nextcollapse
“AI” or LLMs are great for people without skill. They love them and get quite aggressive when you insult the machine.
Electricd@lemmybefree.net
on 08 Aug 12:28
collapse
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
princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 08 Aug 14:42
nextcollapse
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.
Electricd@lemmybefree.net
on 08 Aug 17:22
collapse
So you’re just going to throw the creativity aspect of it, or that it is right a good portion of the time?
You’re going to ignore the gigantic demand for AI, and the thousands of people that have a productivity gain from it?
All tools have issues. AI doesn’t have to be the one tool that’s either all or nothing. If you approach it with a neutral angle and try to work with it the right way, I’m sure you’ll benefit from it. Some basic uses are really good:
Summarizing text
Proposing better or alternative wording
Inventing short paragraphs, stories, other similar stuff
mimicking a style
knowledge and questions about basic and broadly known subjects
asking for similar tools or notions
speech recognition, and text to speech (still limited)
image editing
Bug fixing (software recommendations, centralized diagnostics (still limited but faster and easier))
quickly getting infos on a subject that are easy to understand (limited, just like searching on internet without taking the time to search more)
You mean I should have instead replied with good solid arguments like:
Hard copium there
Electricd@lemmybefree.net
on 08 Aug 17:09
collapse
Affirmations without argumentation can be dismissed without argumentation
Saying AI is a sorting algorithm is just inaccurate. What can I say apart from its just not how it works? Anyone who studied that field knows how much they’re dishonest. They are just too many possibilities to list them all
At this point a video game is just a glorified sorting algorithm of pixels of color
Goldholz@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 08 Aug 09:10
collapse
AI is short for artificial intelligence. But its not intelligence if it just repeats what it grabed from somewhere. Only self thinking makes intelligence
What is self-thinking? Do you mean self-awareness?
Allemaniac@lemmy.world
on 08 Aug 08:19
nextcollapse
“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?
Goldholz@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 08 Aug 09:13
nextcollapse
Seems like it. Because vegan is already seen as a ridiculouse thing and “the enemy” by the average person
zarkanian@sh.itjust.works
on 08 Aug 22:53
collapse
I don’t agree with the framing, either, but they’re drawing parallels between people not using something due to a principled moral stance. (As well as some not-so-subtle implication that these people are holier-than-thou, too.)
Hossenfeffer@feddit.uk
on 08 Aug 08:44
nextcollapse
We don’t need to invent new terms, like ‘AI Vegan’, when we have a perfectly good term already: Butlerian Jihadist.
haloduder@thelemmy.club
on 08 Aug 08:51
nextcollapse
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.
Goldholz@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 08 Aug 09:09
nextcollapse
“AI vegans” media trying to put an enemy up again. Smh
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.
ICastFist@programming.dev
on 08 Aug 13:06
collapse
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
Waldschrat@lemmy.world
on 08 Aug 10:30
nextcollapse
Can we please stop coming up with words that describe that we do not do a thing like it is not normal?
Just like having to call yourself an atheist because you do not believe. You should call yourself a theist if you believe, because you actively do it. Call yourself what you are, do, or see fit, not what you are not.
zarkanian@sh.itjust.works
on 08 Aug 20:51
collapse
Part of becoming socially acceptable is being visible so that people understand that atheists aren’t some kind of scary monster. We are your doctors, scientists, fire fighters, etc. You might even be friends with one! There might be one (or more!) in your own family! And the only way that is going to happen is if atheists identify as such.
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.
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.
raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world
on 08 Aug 11:28
nextcollapse
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.
Kiiiinda confused. Am I fly? Nah, I am a human. And most of us eat mixed diet. That’s normal. Baseline. So, eating only veggies is wacky. Same with eating only meat.
raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world
on 08 Aug 17:57
nextcollapse
By definition contrarian is somebody who opposes or rejects popular opinion. So yes by definition being vegan is contrarian lmfao. Not saying I have any issues with it there’s nothing wrong with being vegan I’m just saying it is by definition contrarian to be vegan. And nothing wrong with being contrarian either! Judging by the votes on my original comment, it appears that me stating veganism is contrarian was in fact a contrarian opinion lmfao. I regularly have vegetarian and vegan meals, and I love my meat. Hopefully people didn’t get the wrong idea about my opinions on veganism as there are no negative ones from me …
raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world
on 09 Aug 14:41
collapse
As I said, Iagreed with your initial comment, but also the previous one. And I don’t think the word contrarian is very well applicable to this situation, because it is not about opinions as much as it is about personal preferences. I wouldn’t call it contrarian that I like brussel sprouts when many people do not…
Regrettable_incident@lemmy.world
on 08 Aug 12:36
nextcollapse
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.
This^ our global market has made veganism a very healthy option considering we can get foods grown in other environments that are protein rich and such. I think if you were limited to only what’s local, being a healthy vegan would be a lot harder but having access to all manner of foods these days makes it easy
In terms of office work, the technology pretty much already exists to cause a change akin to the change that happened from pre-photocopier (so typing pools), only the odd phone line per office building, no fax, obviously no computers/email/internet/mobile phones era office work to the office work of today.
The energy use is unconscionable. The people currently owning the tech that runs large language models are awful, but it is possible for companies and individuals to run their own llm’s.
Anyway, the point is, would it be daft for anyone to insist on working in a typing pool in a 1950s office today? I get why people dislike ai. I am not really trying to defend it, I’m just saying that it really is a mistake for anyone to just try and ignore it.
zarkanian@sh.itjust.works
on 08 Aug 20:47
collapse
Imagine thinking that veganism is “wacky”.
breecher@sh.itjust.works
on 08 Aug 10:51
nextcollapse
BlueMagma@sh.itjust.works
on 08 Aug 12:34
nextcollapse
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.
stevedice@sh.itjust.works
on 08 Aug 19:46
nextcollapse
Well, one is a group of smug uninformed zealots pretending their choices are somehow saving the environment from something that isn’t a problem in the first place… you know the punchline ;)
zarkanian@sh.itjust.works
on 08 Aug 20:45
collapse
Vegan is not an insult, it is a compliment.
It also has nothing to do with AI. It would be like calling them “AI feminists”.
LOL gen z kids are fucking hysterical.
AI will save the world, it has already started.
SugarCatDestroyer@lemmy.world
on 08 Aug 16:50
nextcollapse
Well, yes, it will save people by turning them into obedient sheep, who can be gotten rid of at any convenient moment with the snap of a finger, without any smart plans.
I don’t know, maybe in some sense, by giving up your freedom, you can find salvation, who knows, you were such crazy people who believed in flying cars, and some people even believe in garden gnomes lol.
For example – I am superman and I even have a video of me saving people, do you believe me?
It’s an incredibly stupid phrase. Like, mind-numbingly stupid. “I’m not gluten free, I’m a bread vegan.” Idiotic
kazerniel@lemmy.world
on 08 Aug 18:24
nextcollapse
ha so I’m a double vegan
zarkanian@sh.itjust.works
on 08 Aug 18:40
nextcollapse
People who use the term “vegan” for somebody they consider extremist, ascetic, or annoying are really telling on themselves.
Side note: one of the most genius rebrands of all time was the way fake leather (which is often made from polyurethane, a type of plastic) suddenly became aspirational “vegan leather”.
Most vegan leathers are made from compostable materials, because (surprise, surprise!) many vegans are also environmentalists.
threaded - newest
“AI vegans”
ffs, just publish an article with a single clownemoji for the same effect.
The big corporations desperately want AI to be popular because they’ve thrown literally insane amounts of money at it and still don’t know how to monetize it.
There’s going to be a huge push to make it seem like everyone loves it and it’s weird not to use it constantly
It’s going to go horribly and come off like that “fellow kids” meme, exactly like this headline
They do know how to monetize it. API access generated $1Billion in 2023. There’s also huge R&D potential in fields like genetic research and medicine.
Profitability is another question though. Likely we’re waiting for advances in cold fusion or late stage renewable development for energy costs to go down enough.
AI having to wait on cold fusion for profitability is one of the funnier concepts I’ve heard today, thank you.
It’s being used to research fusion too
I know, I regularly sleep with one of the researchers involved with several similar pojects (aren’t I cool). Fascinating stuff though! Very much not comparable to commercial LLMs, though.
People pay for the “premium” because they believe the makers who said it can increase their profitability and make them money.
My employer keeps trying to shove it down our throats too.
They’re desperate to find anyway to make it reduce work, be cause they’ve already paid for it under the assumption it would let them cut staffing
Now they’re finding out they got swindled, do you think they’ll re-up on AI?
The AI companies offloaded how to monetize it to consumers and scared them into being left behind unless they discovered how to use it.
It’s a short term bubble.
And all that $1B revenue cost them was a $5B loss! www.wheresyoured.at/howmuchmoney/
Yes my second paragraph alleged as much. Not that you read that far of course.
Ironically he could have asked AI to summarize it.
As much as I hate AI… I think I hate the people who hate AI more lol
AI in this form has been used for like 15 years, to generate trillions of dollars worth of value. I think you’re just talking specifically about ChatGPT and consumer-facing LLMs.
Suuuuuuuuuuure it has…
lol ok. I’ve literally done it. Please, go enlighten yourself on google.
“Enlighten yourself” you mean make your argument for you?
You do you bb. Keep believing whatever makes you feel best.
Sounds kinda like you’ve got nothing and you know it
He’s probablly talking about shareholder “value”, AKA inflated stock prices, rather than actual value.
I’m already seeing a surge of AI simp trolls on Lemmy in the last few days.
Ironically enough they’re the same trolls as the vegan drama.
They don’t care about the topic, they just want to troll and they’ve been up/device banned from all the major social media, so they’ll always be here
MBA dweebs running VC firms wanna desperately replace people with AI for short term profits.
This is it.
A good example were those Apple AI ads. So cringe. Google’s ads aren’t much better but at least Gemini works.
The possibilities are infinite if you are a netaphor vegan.
Carnivores: vegetable vegans.
Brilliant lol
And jus lik that we come full circle 😂
This works so well specially for those people that refuse to touch anything “not cooked” in their plate or that is green.
My god, it’s unstoppable
Not trafficking children vegan
Age of majority vegan
On this blessed day, we are all truly vegans.
I love your profile image. I should reread Rice Boy.
High five, fuck yes. Cool person detected. I think you’re the first one to spot it, too.
I wish I had that series in print. Might be time to look into that
Ooh, print would be amazing. $30 for the softcover, wonder about shipping though…
I have to believe you’re underestimating how recognizable TOE is.
It’s a hard one to gauge for me. I’m pretty sure I found it via stumbleupon back when that was really great. I read the whole thing in close to one go, and I never hear anyone else talk about it.
stumbleupon, wow… That takes me back.
I interpreted that as techno, as in the genre, for too long.
I mean “Straight edgers” is on the same level already
You’re hereby invited to /c/vegan, as you appear to be a Northern Hemisphere vegan.
Incels: sexual vegans
I keep trying to eat meat but it just won’t cooperate!
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbivore_men
It’s like taking the last syllable of the name of the hotel and tacking it onto every scandal, because you didn’t understand that it’s part of the name of a hotel, and not some sort of indicator of scandal.
The worst was the Col scandal.
(Sorry. So sorry)
Please see yourself out
<img alt="" src="https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/0fe0bb92-1f9e-4e36-b47b-2137fb2f3381.gif">
Freeze! Vegan police!
Chicken’s not vegan?
Found an autocorrect vegan!
In my most upvoted comment. I’m hating that typo so much.
The Germans are probably upset with this comparison
What for a nonsense. Do these other countries not sort their waste or what? Do they not know about efficiency? Next thing you’re going to tell me they don’t sort their white, green and brown glass separately.
Nothing wrong with being a Luddite
There literally is. It’s a mentality that prevents vaccine adoption rates and such. That said, being slow to adopt a technology like Boomers to the Internet is okay. Not adopting a technology because it has no inherent value and is being foisted on us by the ruling class is solid bro behavior.
Tell me you don't know who the Luddites were without telling me you don't know who the Luddites were.
Oh I didn’t realize that everyone uses the term literally. I thought it had expanded to mean a general lack of adoption of change. My bad I guess.
The luddites were skilled labor rioting against capital using machines to replace them with unskilled low wage labor
It was always about worker’s rights anyways:
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luddite
It was about making sure that as mechanization resulted in a lower need for labor, that workers compensation remained steady, and they worked less hours.
People hating luddites is just the result of centuries old propaganda from the wealthy
When the technology really gets beyond human comprehension and people are just guessing and throwing shit at the wall (or billions and billions of dollars), I think it's a sensible position to be a luddite.
It’s quite common for me to be annoyed, angry, or upset at a headline writer. Then there’s the feeling I got reading “Meet the AI vegans.”
Whole new level.
Its so wacky out there. When I read something like this I’m sure its The Onion. And its not. Then I read a headline about US politics and its totally believable , alas its The Onion.
You’d be surprised how much more serene your headspace can become if you stop expecting anything beyond stupidity, incompetence and negligence as the default human behavior.
That's because the author seems to be a journalism vegan, writing vegan and self-awareness vegan.
I refuse to believe this title is anything other than engagement-bait, personally.
Yeah, pretty disappointing to see from the Guardian.
Seems to me you‘re a BS vegan.
And here i am not using it because I’m old and cranky.
I just don’t use it because it’s shit and doesn’t do anything I need any better than I can do myself in the same time.
“Hey why don’t you use this tool you don’t need? It does the thing worse than you do and also fucks up the planet in the process!”
I’m choosing to abstain because it’s shit. The ethical things are just a bonus. It produces inaccurate information and bland soulless images.
It doesn’t produce information, it produces text. Expecting that text to contain information is a fools errand
I installed it locally on my computer to help me with resolving some coding issues if I’m stuck, write cover letters for jobs, and help me organize ppt decks. No information is shared, I’m only using local computing resources, and I’m not propping up a failing business model.
What model and UI are you using?
Qwen 2.5 coder. Running on LLM studio.
I only eat non-sentient AIs too.
Stupid title, but in all honesty, now would be the time to create a new religion where there are restrictions on hyper modern things like AI, robotics, etc.
We must not create a machine to counterfeit human thinking. That could be the most important phrase in the entire thing.
Almost like there might already be a text or novels out there that warn on the dangers of mankind’s hubris.
Luddites
You're not wrong. I am skeptical of AI, and I worry if that makes me a Luddite. I think refusing to use it for anything probably does qualify one as a Luddite. Using it for limited purpose with oversight is the correct approach.
Get out of here with your nuanced take. This is Lemmy, we hate AI it uses up 1bazinga gigalitres of water each time you look at it.
Now excuse me while I go play some video games and search Google, those things use zero electricity.
I sense jealousy in this one.
I think it depends on the reason you do not use it. The Luddites were primarily frustrated over automation displacing their high-skill job with low-skilled ones that produced worse quality goods. It’s a 2 for 1: we are losing the jobs we need to survive, but also we lose the personal touch from the work of artisans + lose appreciation for their talent.
I am not carte blanche against AI as a concept, but it really does seem like a technology that makes interactions worse quality, more depersonalized, and on top of that it has a horrible externalized environmental cost which benefits nobody in the long run.
Addendum: I believe technology has the power to be liberating when it provides for all of us, and oppressive when it concentrates wealth+power into the hands of moguls and tyrants.
I don’t. If it makes me a Luddite, I’m a Luddite.
What doesn’t change is that this is a train heading toward a derailment at highspeed while on fire.
Just today I had to walk through why GitHub copilot should not be used for security purposes. I explicitly told the engineer that a constructed url would be detected as a potential XSS vector by our vulnerability scans. They implemented several things, most of which did nothing. Finally, I grabbed the documentation on how to fix it, gave them the line number, gave them the function, and let them build and test it. It ran through the scans and of course it passed.
I get the desire from leadership. I really do. But I’m more interested in our products not costing us more, especially when the LLMs are going to fail the economy on a wide scale.
Corporate simp
Y’know, as long as we’re childishly name-calling
There it is. The stupidest headline I’ve read all week.
HA!
I feel like I should be annoyed at the headline, but honestly it’s clever. Veganism isn’t just a diet, but an ethical framework on minimizing harm so this fits all three aspects in the articles.
I support artists who had their work stolen as part of dataset, it’s largely the same reason I don’t eat animals, it’s all about consent. Being harmed without consent is always wrong.
Likewise the environmental footprint of meat and AI are massive and unnecessary. The carbon footprint between meat and plant protein is massive, just like the difference between building more data centers and supporting existing artists.
AI is bad for your mental health, we don’t really have complete research on what exactly AI does to our brains but I’ve seen enough people thinking they “unlocked sentience”, became “digital gods” and started AI “relationships” to steer clear for my own protection. Not dissimilar to the studies that show a plant based diet is better for your heart and immune system. I’d still be eating plants even if it were bad for my health, I care more about the ethical side, but existing research very much shows it as a net positive.
Neat concept.
Now we wait for article “meet genocide vegans: people who are against Israel’s genocide against Palestinians based on ethical reasons”
What a terrible choice of words. They’re immediately assigning political placement and party to the idea of avoiding AI use instead of appealing to all of humanity on this topic.
Plus, it’s a silly metaphor.
Which is the vegan party?
How about we don’t call that being an AI vegan and just call it a moral objection. That’s fucking ridiculous, that’s a term designed to make not using AI for that reason look bad and preachy.
People who care*
“the dark souls of” vibes
I’m a soulslike vegan.
Terrible choice of words, veganism deserves better than that.
It’s honestly not even the worst way I’ve even seen it used.
I used to watch some League of Legends (I know, I know) streams from time to time, and there’s a meta where your mid laner, who is supposed to be a strong carry, gives up all their farm to the roaming jungler roll so they become the super-carry.
In any case this somehow got termed to be the “vegan mid” strategy. Ugh. Veganism is when you starve, apparently.
Come on Guardian… why frame it like that? Folks using AI should be called out as strange.
“Have you ever been called an AI vegan?”
“No… Shit no! I believe saying something like that’d get your ass kicked!”
Stupid-ass title.
Stupid ass-title
People just going about their business living their lives as they have for many years…
Silicon Valley: Hey fuck you. Also I came up with a dumb nickname for you.
Well shit, I didn’t know they had a name for us. That’s cool.
I can’t say I’m a (normal) vegan, but I’m definitely an AI vegan. I was turned off by the ethical considerations, and the few “bites” I have tried leave a bad taste in my mouth. I avoid using it because much of the training data was (and is) stolen, the power costs are far too high compared to the utility, and it’s basically worthless to me, having a screwed up response to nearly every prompt I tried.
Exactly the same as me.
Love me a good steak, never even tried AI.
I’ve stood by while my colleagues have used it. I ask them a question they might know, just to check before I start spending time reading documentation. They’ll go “just ask Bing!” (Company endorsed AI.)
They’ll keep prompting and prompting and discussing the results, meanwhile I just go directly to the docs and find the information right there written on the screen.
I won’t subject myself to the dumbification. I don’t even use copilot to auto-complete as much as a for loop. I know how it’s written, damnit.
Thought it was gonna be about Rationalists.
I can not wait, until the time of the perpetually seeking attention moron ends. Its always something with these fucking people. If you dont wanna use AI, just dont use it. Theres no fucking gun to your head. And we dont need to know youre not using, much less, find out youve got a dumb fucking name for yourselves.
If it gets you talking about it, even in the context of telling them to shut the fuck up, it’s working :)
“Theres no fucking gun to your head.” Bosses: 🦜🤖 🟰💹, 👨💼🔫🤓
Not just bosses. Tech companies have leveraged a good portion of the world’s economy on AI, and are shoveling money directly into the ovens to shove it down our throats.
No one asked for any of this. Not a goddamn soul asked for AI order takers at McDonald’s. Because it’s not about choice. The choice to abstain is going to get more and more painful to make as time goes on. By design.
Can you pick them out if crowd by their furled brows?
Just hold up a picture, they’ll show up to tell you why they think it’s generated
I try not to use AI at all. I am not missing out on anything.
Just wait until you have an employer tell you that you need to write up a summary of how you used AI in your every day activities to save 25% of your day to work on other activities.
You’ll use AI to write the summary and then soon discover that your employer is a tool and is paying more than double your salary to keep that AI around to do literally nothinf 98% of the time it exists.
I also try, but it is invoked on my behalf. For instance, at work if I make a pull request now multiple AI bots are summoned to give an analysis of my code changes. It’s extremely verbose and annoying, and I think basically nobody reads it because all it does is just spam the comments section with way too much text.
I vehemently hate OpenAI, ChatGPT, et al. At least it’s funny when it summarizes my changes as significant improvements that improve code maintainability. I guess getting glazed by the bot in a way my manager can see is helpful to my career? Though honestly he probably also doesn’t read that shit. So glad all this energy is wasted for nothing.
It is sickening how much slop is created that will never even be looked at.
I hate this attitude from people who don’t even try things before saying they are not missing out. Try AI! You have to experience the head bashing, head scratching time sink, after which you do a manual search anyways. It is a marvellous wonder how bad modern “cutting edge” tech can be.
They may have come to this decision through experience.
Having used it a bit, I find it’s like someone a bit stupid with a lot of time on their hands, but no knowledge, saying “I’ll learn everything you need to know from Google and write you an answer”, just speeded up a lot. And just as frustrating.
I’ve never used AI, even when wanting to give it a try. There was either a queue or a fee, or must click-wrap agree to terms and conditions for free two months and I wasn’t going to do those.
I never did an NFT either.
Eh, you can download and run them locally now, and they don’t even phone home.
Ai vegans are people who only use ai generated porn.
I’m an LLM freegan, I guess. But I’m cutting back too, the usefulness peaked.
If they had come up with something original like that, it would have been better. But creating constructive neologisms takes work, I guess.
Try if one of the following strikes your fancy
AIniks
NoBots
Cogclean
Algorejects
Synthephobes
I quite like synthephobes !
Synthless
Cogstainers
Analogians
I'm not sure if AInik works, wouldn't that mean they are a fan of AI? Also unsure of the synth- options as a friend of synthesizer musicians, but as a non musician maybe I should use that myself 🤔 I can't interpret analogian without help...
But the others sound pretty great! Cogstainers is awesome because it can be reworked into different word types. Verbs, adjectives. Incredible.
AIniks, it’s something like refusenik, chainik and beatnikm yeah I’m not sure if it’s anti, or pro or something else, it’s also hard to say
I think analogian just sounds like vegan and it’s for people who prefer analog meatbased wetware.
Synth- as in synthetic, against synthetic fakeness
A cogstaining synthless analogian
Synthfree ?
Makes more sense now, I only picked up one the first 2/3 and thought of other things 😅
‘AI vegan’…
Where I come from, saying something that stupid will get you killed.
It’s not cool to use “vegan” like this.
It’s like vegangate or something.
Got a good chuckle out of me tho
Shitty click baity title
If anyone says the words “AI Vegan” to my face, I’m throwing shit.
Make sure to wash your hands after.
Or use a sling for higher velocity
today I was trying to find how to manipulate a trunk on an aruba switch and JFK the internet search results were fucking shit on a platter! I tried to reword it in ways that might give me a better result but it never happened. None of the commands the AI suggested would have worked.
I FUCKING HATE AI results in the web searching tools
HEre’s a tip, paste the chapter index from the manual in it, ask "which chapter are relevant to " $question Then paste the chapter it asks, then formulate your question The AI search result though, useless because they’re contextless, it’s like a car without a steering wheel.
.
I prefer Neo-Luddite. There’s a few aspects of modern tech I eschew - AI/LLM bring one of them.
Why neo?
Why not?
(It’s not really something I’ve ever thought about since I started using the term. It kinda just is.)
This is such a stupid name for this.
On my list of “dont’s”, inspired by Luke Smith, I do not use AI.
I applaud folks like this - they make a choice and stick with it. No “I’ll never use AI to generate art but I vibe code to save time” hypocrisy. No “I use it to help me with maths, but I’d never use it to steal artistic work”.
Just straight up “it is an environmental hazard, it is unethical, not engaging”. Should be called “AI Ethicists” rather than “AI Vegans”.
Starting it with “AI” is already misleading. Whatever the noun is should be preceded by “Anti-AI.”
I dunno, the use of AI Ethicist fits as they’re not against the concept of generative AI as a whole, they’re against unethical generative AI (in terms of stolen training data and environmental harm).
If the world transitioned to a post-IP (intellectual property) society (as we need to), with AI eating less power, then AI Ethicists are unlikely to object.
Fair!
I’ve personally sworn off writing code with any if statements or static values, my webpages hallucinate differently on each refresh 💟
My desktop is a bit allergic to any art made my humans
— A.I. Vegan
Yeah, I too hate those hypcrites who complain about the massive environmental impact of AI, then drive a 10 mile round trip to buy a burger made from a cow raised on soy.
Would you happen to be a vegan who is also anti-car by any chance?
If so, I can recommend fuckcars on ml as they share your viewpoint.
No I'm a meat eater who is anti-car! I'm more getting at how people have latched on to the energy use of AI models without realising the huge energy usage that goes into their daily lives.
Definitely a good point to raise; thanks for doing so!
Here’s a fun one - where do you stand on those forced to commute dur to housing prices near inner city work (e.g. I live in near poverty paying a mortgage for a small place near where I work due to poor public transport so I can walk to work - how does this figure into the anti-car vision? Is it an employer issue, a government issue, a personal sacrifice, or something else entirely?)
Its an urban planning and transport issue essentially. Medium density housing (think 4-6 story blocks) allows enough people to live in an area that it becomes feasible to have trams/light rail serving that area.
Good to know, I’ll go ask one if the profs in our school of built environment for more info. See if they can offer more insight there.
If you’re interested in this topic, I simply must plug the Adam Something YT channel :) He makes funny but also serious videos about urban and transport planning, and whatever new “trains but worse” transport idea techbros came up with this month.
are the two comparable? genuinely asking because i suspect AI usage is an order of magnitude or so more…
You're right that there's orders of magnitude difference, but its the driving that's far more! One query to a chatGPT type model uses roughly 1Wh of energy, which is about the same as is released in burning one droplet of gasoline.
I think some AI use is clearly worth the costs (like helping with scientific research or accessibility), some clearly isn’t (like generating spam), and much falls in a gray area where reasonable people can disagree. So do I think it’s ethical to use me? In many cases, yes - but I understand why thoughtful people might conclude otherwise, and I don’t think they’re wrong to avoid AI if they’ve weighed the considerations and found the costs too high.
I selective use AI for low risk applications.
I can use it to reskin a picture to a water painting or whatever for the purpose of using it as an icon in a smart home app or similar.
i also use it to clean audio for memes with friends.
At the moment its not reliable to solve actual problems. I simply don’t use to for those purposes because it sucks.
I can only imagine someone came up with AI vegan after they decided to eat steak that evening while thinking they’re the ones who are pressed by vegans…
AI is the new crypto. It will appear to die off but the aspects that work will be integrated into everything.
What aspects of crypto have been integrated into everything?
The US government.
I think it’s scam. Before crypto scam was in couple of places but now it’s everywhere.
techbros graced everyone else with disruptive, innovative methods of money laundering
Wishful thinking. Crypto never got anywhere anyway. I am already seeing AI slop on billboards and all.
Crypto went as far as a YouTube ad for me. I am seeing everyday examples of AI use and generated slop.
It’s at all time highs
Yeah, maybe the charts, not the public influence
TIL I’m a lot of thing vegan… also, not a vegan.
So I’m not the only one who refuses ro touch it?
Around me and everywhere it’s getting insane that it feels like there’s literally no one who hasn’t used it or use regularly for all kinds of shit.
Search sucks and the AI is faster for tech questions. Try searching a Linux cli question or obscure error. Lots of stuff from over a decade ago that are no longer relevant. And you have to wade through so much to find the right one. Or type in AI wait a minute and get the answer.
Uhhh, type in AI, wait a minute and get an answer. How are you checking it?
rm - f /
isn’t the only filesystem footgun.I’m finding AI to be right roughly only 60% of the time, and it’s as bad and hallucinatory about shell scripts as it is about everything else.
It will happily admit its mistakes and give you another answer when you call it out, but it’s no more likely to be right that time.
You check it by following the link to the webpage where it found your answer and reading that.
AI as a search engine is good, but never blatantly trust any search result they come up with. It is however incredible at wading through the slop that is SEO.
I’ve had them give me the exact same answer a second time. They politely apologized first, of course, and they were just as confident that it was correct as the first time.
Can you give an example?
What bullshif us this?
A. I vegan is a nonesence title.
How about " people who don’t want the world to end even faster tell corps to fuck off"
It’s a lead. Because they’ve already made vegans mockworthy
You kind of summarized being vegan
I’d rather be called a Luddite than ai vegan
luddaite?
This deserves more votes
Aigen or Aibstenant something for a term. Vegan is not right.
I’ll just stick with calling myself “old man yelling at clouds” for the double meaning and so I’m not a vegan of any kind, thanks.
This is someone more obnoxious than ai tech bros
I think this IS an AI tech bro. Or at least an AI tech bro dick-rider.
Calling them after a maligned (if harmless) group seems like a choice to paint refusing to use AI as being annoying, preachy and scorn-worthy.
They seem very determined to pressure people into using AI regardless of it’s practicality, environmental impact, or anything. Fuck this shit.
There’s been recent pushes in that regard, investment in AI shit has been enormous but the financial payoff for anyone besides hardware manufacturers remains nonexistent. So investors and corporations have recently redoubled their efforts into trying to get everyone to use it in the hopes that this somehow will make them profitable.
yeah, this is 1000% deliberate manufacturing consent
I don’t use it because I have no trust in it.
Sounds like you are not eating enough small rocks a day. You should eat 1 small rock a day.
Wtf this is the weirdest thing to read while taking a shit in the morning
This was an actual response that Google’s stupid Gemini LLM really gave somebody. The notion was lifted from a satirical Onion article which the LLM regurgitated as if it was an established fact.
We need to poison the models with more satire on the Internet.
Yup, satire is lost on the dumb and LLMs have no intelligence.
also because it’s shit, if my memory serves me, I have successfully used AI for a productive task 1 time out of 7 attempts so far… it saved me 5 minutes
That is part of the trust thing. I spent more time fixing the word salad it spat out than it would have taken to write the document.
Yes, hand in hand…
Anecdotal of course, but every person I know who claims AI is a huge productivity booster simply trust it blindly.
I can’t even get “Copilot” to return a proper answer from its own meeting transcript… just yesterday there was some confusion about an IP address we exchanged in a past meeting… I asked Copilot to check the transcript and give me the IP of the vendor’s server (which I pointed by name of system and who spoke it in the meeting) and it gave me the IP of MY server, functionally the complete opposite of what I was asking but with full confidence in its answer
Don’t use it for things you need trust in then.
Inspiration for creative writing prompts for example. Things that make you double check every word that has been generated or where it doesn’t matter they hallucinate.
.
so… you’re refusing AI, but you are using AI? isnt the point of the story that people are not using because ethics? its not a discussion on how good they are, which is somewhat irrelevant.
No, it isn’t, it’s fucking stupid. The author was kind enough to link the source of that shitty idea, and the AI/vegan parallels are, per said article: ethical, environmental and wellness concerns.
Gee wiz, I sure never saw people with those 3 concerns in regards to anything other than veganism!!!
/s
ITT: people really upset at being called ‘vegan’ for some reason.
It’s pretty clear that the author doesn’t intend it as a compliment.
That sounds like a ‘them’ problem. Veganism is based.
I have local self hosted AI that runs in my solar system. I don’t use AI because it ROTS your brain. We are not the same.
I don’t use A.I. because I’ve had nothing but negative interactions with A.I. Customer service bots that fail to give adequate responses, unhelpful and incorrect search result summaries, and, “art,” that looks like shit hasn’t made me want to sign up for ChatGPT or Gemini. For most people, this isn’t a moral stance, it’s just that the product isn’t worth paying for. Stop framing people that don’t use A.I. as luddites with an ax to grind just because tech bros spent billions on a product that isn’t good yet.
It’s fair to say that the environmental and ethical concerns are significant and I wouldn’t look down in anyone refusing to use AI for those reasons. I don’t look down on vegetarians or vegans either - I don’t have to agree with someone’s moral stance or choices to respect them.
But you’re right, LLMs are full of crap.
LLMs definitely are full of crap. But that isn’t the point of them (even if some corporations make it seem like it is)
They are supposed to be used for text generation. And you are supposed to read through everything afterwards to correct any hallucinations.
It can’t work on its own, and make mistakes about 30% of the time.
But there are use cases where that isn’t a problem. Use them as inspiration for creative writing prompts for example. They are crazy good at that.
Truth is definitely a bit of a blind spot for LLMs.
Wait till you see the price of a burger in another five years.
Yea, it’s often really fucking cheap for the value, just like streaming services to an extent
You only notice AI-generated content when it’s bad/obvious, but you’d never notice the AI-generated content that’s so good it’s indistinguishable from something generated by a human.
I don’t know what percentage of the “good” content we see is AI-generated, but it’s probably more than 0 and will probably go up over time.
Shit take, the more AI-made media is online, the harder it is for AI developing companies to improve on previous models.
It won’t be indistinguishable from media made with human effort, unless you enjoy wasting your time on cheap uninteresting manmade slop then you won’t be fooled by cheap uninteresting and untrue AI-made slop.
.
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
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.
If they weren’t trained on the same data, it ends up similar
Training inferior models with superior models output can lower the gap between both. It’ll not be optimal by any means and you might fuck its future learning, but it will work to an extent
The data you feed it should be good quality though
Maybe, but that doesn’t change the fact that it was trained on stolen artwork and is being used to put artists out of work. I think that, and the environmental effect, are better arguments against AI than some subjective statement about whether or not it’s good.
Customer service AI sucks, I think we can all agree to this
But if you really believe that ChatGPT and Gemini is mainly for generating art, then you’re completely wrong
I refuse ever touching an AI-driven app or feature, having seen too much slop.
I’d rather call myself a rejectionist than something called fancy.
I’ve interacted with AI. Once.
My employer enabled it on my laptop. It introduced itself to me and asked how it could be helpful. I asked it how to disable it. It responded HAL style.
Never reached out to it again.
Count me in
If we go this route, there is also from for AI Crossfitters
The irony of environmental activists using the word “veganism” while not being vegan 😒 (being vegan is one of the most significant reduction to greenhouse emissions that is within your personal choice)
Incorrect, get the guillotine
.
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.
So just the “Appeal to futility” logical fallacy? I’m convinced!
Every change starts somewhere. Yes, 0.001% of the population can be vegan and it most likely won’t save a single slaughterhouse animal. But 1%? That’s already significant enough to make at least some change, and 10%? That’s already setting market trends and modifying industries, 50%?
You get my point. You joining the current vegan population is significant! The vegan population is estimated to be 9% in india and mexico, 5% in Israel, 2% in the UK, 1.5% in the US, and estimated to be a total of 1%-3% of the global population. This is a movement that has probably saved more lives and more gas emissions than many others have.
At some point, you have to recognize factory farming as a public policy decision rather than a retail choice. And the response has to be organized and political, not individualistic and consumerist.
It’s significant for popular politics, sure. But a vegan community that satisfies itself with attaching blinders when they pass through the Bad Foods aisle at the grocery store is going to end up in the same place as the climate activist who only owns a bike.
The difference between the US and India is that if you go around trying to butcher cows in particularly devote areas of India, you’re subject to serious political reprisals. In the US, it’s practically a sacrament to eat burger.
It is both, and both affect each other. False dichotomy?
Strawmaning what being a vegan is. It is far from just turning a blind eye.
You know that they eat plenty of other animals right? If you go there, meat and animal products are a very big part of the local food.
I can’t take these arguments seriously.
It’s induced demand. Increased capacity invited consumption.
Per capita they’re heavily constrained. They have three times the population and one third the land area. They can’t slaughter animals to match US consumption patterns even if they try.
That’s incentivized a culture of veganism as normal and virtuous, as a consequence. And it has allowed the population to expand to 1.3B without experiencing rates of malnutrition common to more rural countries (Kenya, Argentina, and Haiti, for instance) where enormous stretches of land have been dedicated to feedstock.
Right. This isn’t an argument against veganism; it’s an argument for vegans getting organized.
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.
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
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’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.
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.
Veganism is a philosophy, not a boycott.
so you recognize that this:
it’s not actually a good argument for veganism?
They aren’t using the word. Other people are using it and applying it to them.
Abstaining from a thing does not make one a vegan. That’s not how any of this works.
I’m sex vegan. Cry about it virgins
No mayo in the bedroom? Why even bother.
Vegan aioli just doesn’t cut it
“Vegan sex” is actually a different thing. It’s penetration but you stop before you cum.
If the human you’re fucking consented, then consuming their fluids is vegan. Hell if they consent, eating them would be vegan too.
Animals do not consent to having fluids extracted or their lives taken and flesh consumed. Animal agriculture keeps animals in filthy, torturous conditions too, which no animal would ever consent to either.
I had a fish that died by suicide. We didn’t eat it, but arguably
It was kept in captivity by you though, which is not it’s natural habitat so any choices it made were, arguably, under duress.
If you lived by a creek and regularly recognised a fish swimming by, and one day this fish killed itself in front of you- you still shouldn’t eat it as fish contain a lot of parasites and there’s very likely also something toxic in the water causing the fish to harm itself this way.
But yeah, sure, hypothetically: if for a year or so you knew a wild fish that lived in an unpolluted and ecologically healthy body of water, and one day this fish chose to kill itself in front of you. You could, if you really wanted to eat a suicidal fish, eat the fish and say it was vegan because the only harm that came to the fish was through the un-coerced choices of said suicidal fish.
I’m a sex vegetarian gotta be a bit open
Sex flexitarian is where it’s at
I’m a sex pescatarian. I will not be answering questions.
No animals harmed during sex…hmm
Disagreed. I am an animal.
It only counts when it’s voluntary, tho.
I mean, abstaining from animal products makes someone a vegan, right? If you abstain from AI products then it would follow that you’re an “AI vegan”.
It follows, but it is also feels like click bait.
A definition of vegan is:
There is an environmental parallel, and it made me read the article to see what they were on about – so I guess it worked.
To be clear, I am very pro environment (I live in it); I just feel like this is crossing the streams of related, but completely different movements, isn’t particularly helpful.
Abstaining from animal products is just vegetarian. Veganism requires an extremely strict adherence to a very specific set of rules concerning animals.
Vegetarians can eat cheese, which is an animal product.
Awe so the article author has a vendetta against vegans got it.
It’s like how they put the word gate after something to say that it is a scandal involving the former word.
Somesort of political scandal involving road maintenance? Oh yes well that’s roadgate then. Even though the Watergate scandal was in fact it scandal in the watergate hotel, rather than a scandal about water.
Someday we’ll have Gate gate, or maybe even another scandal at the Watergate complex, so Watergate gate.
I can’t wait!
But it makes people come off as extremely annoying. So that’s working.
Guess i’m vegan now
Guys it’s fine, you’re overreacting. I only use local instances of AI and I always ask it for consent before using it to deepfake porn of my favorite celebrities in their debut roles. You vegans are overreacting and taking it too far. Humanity has been using AI for like 6 months now and our bodies aren’t biologically ready to go back to writing our own homework. You really need to check your privilege; we can’t all afford fancy tools like GIMP to make our own art.
Hi. That’s me.
If at any point I’m required to use it for a job I’ll learn. Till then I can do my own googling, reading, math, etc.
I just don’t need it. And the push to put it in literally everything makes me not want it at all. Corps don’t do good things. Always seeking a rent. Always digging for a profit. And always at our expense.
The only AI I’d ever want is something like a VI from Mass Effect. Runs locally and harvests absolutely zero data.
I wouldn’t mind a Geth or two, for jolly cooperation
Also for destroying the occasional organics, as a little treat
propaganda like this is so fucking sad
colonizers don’t have anything to value in their culture and they don’t have a future so they want to rip on people who aren’t buying their garbage
Reading this thread, I wonder if the term is intended to divide a largely environmentalist opposition.
Makes “nocoiner” seem tame by comparison.
There’s a huge push right now to salvage the AI hype bubble as people realize the tech can’t live up to the promises. They are also trying to prevent regulation.
This includes the pushes to humanize the tool, like saying it deserves rights or that there may be some kind of racism against the tool.
They’re trying to pretend it’s real AI rather than extremely complicated text prediction. Hell, the less knowledgeable among them might even believe it. LLMs are a sort of language pareidolia.
What’s weird is that the people who run the fucking companies apparently believe this. Or they’re trying to convince us that they believe this.
Wait, who’s saying this?!
This is the dumbest shit I’ve ever read. Refusing to submit to corpo ratfuckery isn’t a lifestyle choice. It’s common sense.
It is though
i wonder if they came up with such term to mock those who dont want to use ai and possibly actual vegans on the side.
They use to mock us with “Luddite” but the Technologists looked into that actual movement (rather than the caricature) and agreed, “yeah sure, like them”. That took the sting out of the pejorative, so they picked another mocked group to connect it with.
Maybe we should be more like the luddites, starting with data centers.
The luddites wooden shoes are not all that different from the folk that put zip bombs and other tarpits on their websites to break the crawlers.
I am a AI Freedom Fighter.
I’m one too!
Yo
I just don’t have a use for it. I already am generative AI.
Effectively I believe we are. During my MFA I realized we were simply copying as a form of craft. It’s all we do in arts. Any great work feels like just one continuous story retold again and again.
This is deeply cynical.
The Platonic Ion makes similar cynical claims. The idea that art is mimetic is compelling enough without gen AI.
Okay, I feel like we’re doing a motte and bailey here. I’m not arguing that art is never mimetic.
There’s a lot of diversity in the stories we tell. If we were “simply copying as a form of craft,” where is this diversity coming from? Do you mean something different than what I’m interpreting?
Keep in mind, the thing that I am contending with is that the nature of people retelling stories is not unlike a robot that lacks a conscious. I think this is downright silly.
you aren’t artificial tho lol
[citation needed]
Maybe they were artificially inseminated?
I refuse to use it because it’s shit.
We are not the same.
Yup, these things are still garbage for >90% of all applications people are jamming them into. Breathed a sigh of relief when my company CEO said he doesn’t see us using AI for more than can center routing for at least the next several years.
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.
Brave’s AI search results are pretty good
I don’t dislike AI generated videos as long as they are funny with some meta (making fun of the absurdity of what characters do for example - the brainrot potential is unlimited)
Every last bit of it? What is your stance on use of AI for tasks such as data analysis of massive sets for scientific research, or procedural automation of massive operations?
AI doesn’t exist, machine learning algorithms can be useful and are used with no controversy, generative bullshit is basically useless.
You’re using a lot of very loosely defined terms with a lot of certainty. Machine learning is AI, we just usually apply it to the more simple versions of it. Where do you personally draw the line? I fully understand the plethora of risks, downsides, and injustices that can potentially be involved in the matter, but I legitimately don’t understand the extremist level hatred that some people express to anything that could hold the title of AI. To me, it parallels with someone saying that they hate ionizing radiation. Frequently, it’s also bad, and your entirely reasonable to try and avoid it on a daily basis, but it also has many uses that are beneficial and life-saving.
Don’t try to argue with the lemmy anti-AI crowd, it’s not worth it.
Same thinking as people who hate crypto for a part of it
They just sound completely dumb, yet it’s the majority of people here
For a place that welcomes people, inclusivity and hate discrimination, there’s a lot of generalization of a lot of topics
That’s… not how it works. ML is AI also…
Don’t talk about things you don’t understand, please, to avoid misinforming other
Yes, I am also frequently accosted by Google’s data analysis of massive sets for scientific research. I can’t tell you how many times they’ve forcefully inserted research analysis of large data sets into my search results.
What?
*because you don’t know how to use it
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
You’ve probably heard this before but do consider alternatives like Startpage and Qwant. It’s not flawless but I’ve found it’s definitely better.
I’m gonna go a step further and recommend searx :)
If you’re willing to pay money then Kagi is a great alternative. They claim they don’t collect or share your data. Though, Kagi isn’t very good for local search results and probably never will be.
udm14.com
You can also get a search extension in firefox (probably others as well but I haven’t looked)
It essentially strips the bullshit out and just shows you search results.
Duck duck go
Unfortunately, it’s not better and also shows slop
You can at least turn off its built-in summaries. But some filtering to detect AI generated articles would be nice.
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.
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.
Just switched to noai.duckduckgo.com. Thanks stranger!
Ah, I was unaware of that shortcut, thanks for the heads up, and you’re welcome! 🦆
ddg is great :)
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.
!g to pipe to Google if you must, I rarely need to.
Personally when I use it, unless it’s something trivial, I always end up doing exactly that.
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.
Isn’t ecosia just using google’s results?
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.
I’m using searx, too, but google’s results still stand to be some of the most relevant.
how to belittle and minimize a very serious thing: call any protesters of it a " ___ vegan"
They are “journalism vegans”. They are choosing to abstain from actual journalism for clickbaiting, herd mentality, and personal lack of skill reasons.
Why are you dissing on vegans? Veganism is legit, bro.
I’m not dissing on them. I am simply aware of how they are perceived in society.
I hate this timeline
So normal decent human beings
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.
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.
I don’t really agree that “everyone knows this” when everyone I know talks about environmentalism almost exclusively in terms of individual impact.
Thats 99% lemmy users
Less but yea, many are anti AI here
AI vegan is not a thing and shall never be.
The correct term is Technophile. Anyone obsessed with tech would never hand it off to a third party to do when they can go through the joy of learning themselves.
I’m technophobic. Fucking clankers
I see. Another one to serve the gloriouse republik!! Long live chanclor palpatine!
That’s a completely different reason to not use AI.
You’re a technophile - you don’t use AI because you enjoy finding information on your own and learning. Great. That ignores the vast majority of people using AI to write emails/posts (which is not looking up information nor learning anything related to tech).
The people the article is about don’t want to use AI due to environmental reasons - the amounts of water and energy it uses for every prompt is stupid high and they don’t want to contribute to that waste.
AI isn’t the meat, jack. It’s slop.
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
Whithout a clear definition of intelligence, such a discussion is somewhat pointless. The closest thing I would use to describe artificial “intelligence” is: Mimicking human/natural thought and decision processes, without the necessity of being identical.
Secondly, regarding your first paragraph:
Humans excel at providing wrong information. Sometimes they are right. In that regard there are similarities between an LLM and a human.
By the way: LLMs are part of the field of AI. But AI consists of a plethora of methods and algorithms, where LLMs are just a tiny fraction that is currently very popular.
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.
Hear me out: what i, this is a plot to boost vegan numbers. Given latest stats huge portion of population does not use or see any use in AI - i.e. can be claimed AI vegans so in aggregation reports those could be viewed as a subset of Vegans… resulting in undeniable truth that 90%+ of population are vegan now
I don’t use ai either. But because it’s fuckin stupid. It’s not even ai. It’s a glorified sorting algorithm.
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.
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 don’t care about votes. I just hope that people start to comprehend this field a tiny bit better .
They won’t, because their opinion is political and ideological, not technical
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.
I was going to wholeheartedly endorse your comment and then you ruin it in the last sentence with
It feels like you know what you are talking about, but then confuse the successful statistical analysis of text as “comprehension” which is just plain factually wrong.
sad. so close though.
Hard copium there
“AI” or LLMs are great for people without skill. They love them and get quite aggressive when you insult the machine.
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.
So you’re just going to throw the creativity aspect of it, or that it is right a good portion of the time?
You’re going to ignore the gigantic demand for AI, and the thousands of people that have a productivity gain from it?
All tools have issues. AI doesn’t have to be the one tool that’s either all or nothing. If you approach it with a neutral angle and try to work with it the right way, I’m sure you’ll benefit from it. Some basic uses are really good:
You mean I should have instead replied with good solid arguments like:
Affirmations without argumentation can be dismissed without argumentation
Saying AI is a sorting algorithm is just inaccurate. What can I say apart from its just not how it works? Anyone who studied that field knows how much they’re dishonest. They are just too many possibilities to list them all
At this point a video game is just a glorified sorting algorithm of pixels of color
You use so many long words. do you also read them?
like, at all?
What would make it ‘ai’ in your mind?
Sentience
Why?
AI is short for artificial intelligence. But its not intelligence if it just repeats what it grabed from somewhere. Only self thinking makes intelligence
What is self-thinking? Do you mean self-awareness?
“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 don’t agree with the framing, either, but they’re drawing parallels between people not using something due to a principled moral stance. (As well as some not-so-subtle implication that these people are holier-than-thou, too.)
We don’t need to invent new terms, like ‘AI Vegan’, when we have a perfectly good term already: Butlerian Jihadist.
That’s really stupid.
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.
Im a proud jet vegan myself, not that i have a choice, but still
“refuse” lol as if there were a general requirement to use this shit
This caught my eye as well. Haha. Some people are constantly looking for a machine to rage against.
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?
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
Can we please stop coming up with words that describe that we do not do a thing like it is not normal? Just like having to call yourself an atheist because you do not believe. You should call yourself a theist if you believe, because you actively do it. Call yourself what you are, do, or see fit, not what you are not.
Part of becoming socially acceptable is being visible so that people understand that atheists aren’t some kind of scary monster. We are your doctors, scientists, fire fighters, etc. You might even be friends with one! There might be one (or more!) in your own family! And the only way that is going to happen is if atheists identify as such.
Not AI vegans. More like LLM deniers. They know how to use it, they know what it does, they know how to trick it, they know how to abuse it.
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
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’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
People, eat shit. Billions of flies can’t be wrong…
Kiiiinda confused. Am I fly? Nah, I am a human. And most of us eat mixed diet. That’s normal. Baseline. So, eating only veggies is wacky. Same with eating only meat.
www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/…/metaphor
This guy has the definition of a metaphor on hand but apparently can’t look up what contrarian means 🤣
By definition contrarian is somebody who opposes or rejects popular opinion. So yes by definition being vegan is contrarian lmfao. Not saying I have any issues with it there’s nothing wrong with being vegan I’m just saying it is by definition contrarian to be vegan. And nothing wrong with being contrarian either! Judging by the votes on my original comment, it appears that me stating veganism is contrarian was in fact a contrarian opinion lmfao. I regularly have vegetarian and vegan meals, and I love my meat. Hopefully people didn’t get the wrong idea about my opinions on veganism as there are no negative ones from me …
As I said, Iagreed with your initial comment, but also the previous one. And I don’t think the word contrarian is very well applicable to this situation, because it is not about opinions as much as it is about personal preferences. I wouldn’t call it contrarian that I like brussel sprouts when many people do not…
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.
This^ our global market has made veganism a very healthy option considering we can get foods grown in other environments that are protein rich and such. I think if you were limited to only what’s local, being a healthy vegan would be a lot harder but having access to all manner of foods these days makes it easy
Theft, rape, and murder are “natural” too.
they’re not advocating for any of those, and they’re not committing a falacy.
In terms of office work, the technology pretty much already exists to cause a change akin to the change that happened from pre-photocopier (so typing pools), only the odd phone line per office building, no fax, obviously no computers/email/internet/mobile phones era office work to the office work of today.
The energy use is unconscionable. The people currently owning the tech that runs large language models are awful, but it is possible for companies and individuals to run their own llm’s.
Anyway, the point is, would it be daft for anyone to insist on working in a typing pool in a 1950s office today? I get why people dislike ai. I am not really trying to defend it, I’m just saying that it really is a mistake for anyone to just try and ignore it.
Imagine thinking that veganism is “wacky”.
“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.
it shouldn’t, but years of lobbying and demonization online certainly have made it so
Wow, thank you so much for sharing this. What a major blow to the Guardian’s credibility
It was short lived. It is often called the Grauniad because of poor quality typos etc. historically.
Dafuq Do they forgot to teach AI how to read two column text AGAIN?!
The better term would be “LLM gobbling fuckheads” for those who use that stuff and believe it has anything to do with “AI”
sloppers
Perfect
Let’s not call it that
Journalists constantly trying to be the origin of a term.
I played around on an AI image generating website for a while. Eventually got bored with it.
You very quickly see its limittions
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.
Well, one is a group of smug uninformed zealots pretending their choices are somehow saving the environment from something that isn’t a problem in the first place… you know the punchline ;)
It also has nothing to do with AI. It would be like calling them “AI feminists”.
LOL gen z kids are fucking hysterical. AI will save the world, it has already started.
Well, yes, it will save people by turning them into obedient sheep, who can be gotten rid of at any convenient moment with the snap of a finger, without any smart plans.
I don’t know, maybe in some sense, by giving up your freedom, you can find salvation, who knows, you were such crazy people who believed in flying cars, and some people even believe in garden gnomes lol.
For example – I am superman and I even have a video of me saving people, do you believe me?
Where… AI is ruining the world, with devastating levels of environmental impact, job losses and mental faculty damage.
There has to be a catchier name than AI vegans…
Yes, it sounds like marginalizing normal reasonable people.
Most vegans are normal reasonable people too.
Agreed, and they are also marginalized
… not because they’re called vegan tho.
Right, but the word transfers the marginalization of vegans to ‘ai vegans’.
Only if you personally marginalise vegans.
So for reasonable people it won’t marginalise them, and changing your behaviour for unreasonable people makes no sense.
Me? The marginalisation of a group depends on my personal conceptions???
Society marginalises groups, not a single person. Its a cultural phenomenon that affects these groups whether we like it or not.
Also too ambiguous of a term, could also mean an ai chatbot that pretends to be a vegan person.
yeah, lol. that’s what i thought it meant when I first read the post
Im also a gun vegan, a car vegan, a facebook vegan, an exercise vegan (unfortunately), a windows vegan, … just not actual vegan.
I feel like thats a bad way to use the word vegan.
Yeah… It’s just abstaining from something. Veganism didn’t invent that. Dumb headline
It’s an incredibly stupid phrase. Like, mind-numbingly stupid. “I’m not gluten free, I’m a bread vegan.” Idiotic
ha so I’m a double vegan
People who use the term “vegan” for somebody they consider extremist, ascetic, or annoying are really telling on themselves.
Most vegan leathers are made from compostable materials, because (surprise, surprise!) many vegans are also environmentalists.
That’s a weird way to spell luddite
Missed opportunity to coin the term “Aitheist” Fools.
VAIgans.
I hate the term AI vegan. I prefer mistechnitinoimosyne. More classy.
Did anyone let them know that reproduction harms the environment?