998
No good outcome here (media.piefed.zip)
submitted 5 months ago by to c/fuck_ai@lemmy.world
113 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
No good outcome here
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] -1 points 5 months ago (4 children)

As it's currently being used, but that doesn't make it an inherent quality.

In WWII, fascists used tanks and planes. Does that make tanks and planes the tools of fascists? What about the Allies who used tanks and planes to defeat the fascists?

As things stand now, with the current governments, yes AI is being used by fascists, and when it inevitably crashes the economy the fascists in power will bail out the reach while leaving the poor to foot the bill.

But it's pretty unimaginative to assume that the fascist government can't or won't be replaced with one that will actually allow the billionaires to fail due to their own greed, and use the collective wealth from taxpayer funds to actually help the poor survive the economic disaster.

If you've already abandoned that possibility, then what's the point of anything? We might as well give up now if that's the case...

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    Until it is powered by nuclear fusion (or fiiine, even nuclear fission), AI will always be harmful to the environment and therefore its existence will always be a net negative.

    Your 'streamlined work flow' does not justify the loss of a single animal life.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 5 months ago* (2 children)

    I never said otherwise, I just said generalizing it as "a tool for fascists" commits a logical fallacy that we shouldn't be normalizing.

    There are plenty of valid critiques you can make of AI. Focus on those without commiting fallacies and I'll probably agree with you.

    Your 'streamlined work flow' does not justify the loss of a single animal life.

    Don't put words in my mouth. When the fuck did I ever use the phrase "streamlined workflow"?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 child)

    It's far more useful for fascists and capitalists than it is for the average person, so... disagreed that it's a logical fallacy. It's a tool for fascists.

    Don’t put words in my mouth. When the fuck did I ever use the phrase “streamlined workflow”?

    You'll note that I used single quotes instead of double quotes. I was arguing against one commonly-cited (though not necessarily by you) benefit of AI to counter your point that "not all uses of AI are bad".

    It seemed a little more tactful than, "No, your CSA-generating machine does not justify the loss of the Amazon Rainforest."

    All uses which don't directly or indirectly save lives are bad so long as they have a negative impact on the environment.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago*

    I never even defended AI, so all your arguments against it are strawmen because they misrepresent the point that I was making (which doesn't contradict all this stuff you're adding about why it's bad; again, if you simply listed the reasons why it's bad then I would be agreeing with you).

    And do you not know what a logical fallacy is, or how logical validity works? A fallacious argument can incidentally be true, but that doesn't make it a valid argument.

    "If I'm anemic, then it's raining outside. I'm anemic, therefore it's raining outside."

    This argument commits a fallacy, because the consequent does not follow from the antecedent. The conclusion could happen to be true, but that doesn't matter. It could be raining outside, and I could make this argument, but that wouldn't make it valid just because the conclusion is true. The soundness of the premises and conclusion don't matter when the argumentative structure itself is invalid.

    I never said "Actually, AI is good." All I said was "Just because fascists use it, does not make it 'the tool of fascism.'"

    There are plenty of valid critiques you can make about AI. Focus on those. But if you make a fallacious argument, don't assume I'm defending AI just because I point that out.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent