305
Witnessed someone argue that genAI is socialist because it's a "free resource" and that "art is imperialist" and I'm just gobsmacked (lemmy.world)
submitted 2 days ago by to c/fuck_ai@lemmy.world
102 comments fedilink hide all child comments
🤯 2
 

His argument was literally that

  • artists, writers, and programmers are "labor aristocracy" and deserve no respect because they're sitting around making art and writing code while other people are toiling and laboring,
  • genAI is a "free resource" ("it's free for me to use at work") that "helps everyone make things" instead of having to rely on skill and expertise and therefore makes everything equal,
  • it's hypocritical of people to be worried about the environmental and societal impact of genAI because "only white people are worried about it now that their hobbies are being threatened and everyone else is catching up".

Pointing out there there are artists and programmers from every race and economic class, as well as perfectly ordinary people in every walk of life who are all actively being harmed both by the theft of ideas and labor and by the physical effects of gigantic data centers ruining communities, was met with much hand-waving and incredibly impenetrable philosophical jargon.

I'm particularly incensed because I'm as leftist and anticapitalist as they come and this felt like the fuckery some conservative cockwomble would try to come up with to parody socialism, except this guy was completely serious.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 0 points 6 hours ago (1 child)

I can ask it how relativity works and it will tell me, I can ask it to explain something differently and it will, I can ask it to eli12 and it will dumb it down. Of course there is a maximum compression, that doesn't make what these learn not useful.

And you can train it to do whatever you want, be confident, be persuasive, be accurate, nothing inherent about the model makes it go one way or another. And if you glue them into another system containing verified facts (database or a wiki or something) then you can very easily get very high accuracy

And we are literally 5 years in since chatgpt dropped and these things have gone from "can finish the line of the function your working on" to "can do basically anything on a computer code wise" ..METR stopped doing their horizon benchmark because it got too expensive to develop longer horizon tasks and frontier models have saturated what they already have

I think this is something anti ai crowd miss a lot too, these models are currently as bad as they'll ever be, all the issues people have are just bugs that can and will be fixed ... Or left in depending on the wants of the wannabe overlords running the thing

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 hours ago

    You're pointedly wondering if anti AI is a psyop to keep people from using it while we actively have people using it to push agendas. Simpler of two conspiracy theories.

    So how do you know it's explanation of relativity is correct? With a library, you have a notion that there was review. With the traditional Internet research, you have multiple sources. With an LLM you have its unwavering confidence, and when you catch it being wrong a conciliation "you're totally right to push back on that".

    The models are inherently biased to emulate the patterns in their training set. That leads to communicating like people do in the training set, which if they're including factual information means "stating facts" as a demeanor, regardless of accuracy.

    the issues people have are just bugs that can and will be fixed

    My program to climb a ladder to the moon is going great. Every day I'm buying new ladders, climbing higher, putting the new ladder on top of taller and taller buildings and my massive stack of ladders. My progress has been consistent, steady, and relentlessly forward, so there's no reason to think I'll ever hit a roadblock.

    Training these models is incredibly expensive and it's far from clear that it's a financially viable venture.
    The overt data processing requirements sets limits on what the minimum infrastructure requirements are.
    The big names in the field are aggressively unprofitable.

    There's this thing called an AI winter. After a big cycle of hype around AI, people get sick of it and others feel let down or disillusioned by the reality vs the implied benefits. Then the field collapses back to researchers and it repeats in 20-30 years.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent