704
100% human-made art by Andrea Guzzetta (lemmy.world)
submitted 1 week ago by to c/lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world
152 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

top 74 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 32 points 1 week ago (3 children)

I didn't go through 8 years of grueling computer science and engineering education to ask an AI to do my fucking job.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
    • [–] 14 points 1 week ago (2 children)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
    • [–] 28 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (36 children)

    There should be a way to acknowledge two things being true at the same time, but that way was never discovered on Lemmy.

    "AI is mostly bad" and "AI can be useful at times" are both true statements. You sacrifice nothing by acknowledging both, and thinking you have to pick between the two is, ironically, mentally lazy af.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 36 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 1 week ago* (18 children)

    Most people agree that there are legitimate applications for LLM technology, like in the medical field. This comes up every single thread.

    Then you have trillions of dollars of investment on the promise of eroding worker power, and letting capital enunciate itself without labour. That's what it's essentially all for.

    The "legitimate" uses of the technology are not even a passing concern for investors except insofar as they can point to it to excuse their grift.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 week ago (6 children)

    What is the legitimate use for LLMs in the medical field?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 week ago (5 children)

    Like medical research, discovering drugs, folding proteins. There's also evidence they can be used to help analyse x-rays.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago (4 children)

    LLMs don't do those things. Do you know what an LLM is?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago (3 children)

    Rightrightright, I mean they can help with that stuff by churning though large sets of data or by statistical analysis to look for early signs of cancer, etc.

    I'm not a researcher and I don't use them myself, but I know a thing or two about how LLMs work. Could be you could school me though if you know a lot.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    I'm just saying the models used in medical imaging and protein folding, to use your examples, are not LLMs, but very different dedicated medical imaging models or protein folding models. Still falls under the overarching umbrella of AI/ML, but not really any more relevant to language models. LLMs also aren't a very relevant tool for big data or statistical analysis. Even with an agent harness, they could be used to write scripts that a human could also write, but couldn't directly do any sort of reliable statistical analysis.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago (1 child)

    Oh OK I wasn't aware of that. Actually I wondered as I was writing my comment how an LLM would compare to more tightly fitted model.

    Well there goes my one example. Is there anything they're legitimately good for? I'll admit they seem good at finding "fuzzy" connections, and their text and image generation capabilities are impressive even if they aren't my cup of tea—mostly because of the externalities.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago

    They're good for coding simple things for yourself if you don't want to learn to code or spend hours making something you will use once. Kinda like fast food.

    You could argue I can learn to cook better and spend the time to do so. But I don't always want to and fast food is good enough. Same with llm. I can ask it to make me a Web app that does X and have it in seconds. All the usual worries about bugs and security don't apply as strongly to an app I make for just me that does just one thing.

    Like say I'm at a takeaway shop with multiple people and the only menu is the board behind the counter. I take a couple photos, send them to the llm and say make me a menu app that I can add and remove items and it tracks the price. I will have it in under a minute and we can stop trying to read the board and block the counter and have the cashier patiently staring at us while we browse it in our own time and know exactly what the total will be.

    Now you can quibble over whether that's "genuinely useful" or not. But it is to me. And I make tons of these simple one use apps for all kinds of things. And even if I was the best coder on earth, it still wouldn't be practical to hand make the same thing on the fly. Also hyper specific Firefox add-ons that don't exist because they're too specific to me and I didn't want to learn to make Firefox add-ons just to have them.

    Even on the larger end, I wanted a lucid dream journal app and at the time the ones on the play store largely pay walled the best features and even pay walled exporting your journal. I didn't like that. So I had llm make me a basic one with the features I wanted, everything stored as txt files with export/import and ability to back up to drop box by oauth into a dedicated folder that can't touch the rest of my Dropbox. Even if llm disappeared and the app broke and I couldn't fix it I still have my entire journal as plain text.

    So yeah. I find it useful. Because the alternative isn't me learning to code. It's these things not existing.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 1 week ago (10 children)

    You say most people believe this, but I see many people every day for weeks now claiming Linux is vibecoded now. Why? Three stories: 1) months ago LLM use was not outright banned in kernel development 2) Linus admitted to using LLMs in an experimental branch to find and patch bugs 3) a recent shift in attitude happened, toward LLM-driven PRs because there were too many, and the reaction from Linus and the other maintainers was to raise the bar for submitting PRs to reduce the chance of slop wasting people's time.

    All of this was a series of level headed responses and course corrections which at no time was indicative of anything more than LLMs are useful sometimes. Yet people all over Lemmy are saying shit like "Linux is all in on vibecoding". Besides that issue, I've seen and been involved in many conversations where idiots will say that any use of AI is super unethical and unacceptable. The binary thinking on this issue is strong on here.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago* (9 children)

    Ah well I agree I would Linux love maintainers to take a more principled stance against LLM contributions given all the negative externalities of the technology as it exists today.

    there's a strong case to be made that there is no way to use the current "frontier" models ethically because of how they were trained and who their patrons are. I would love to see that acknowledged.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago (2 children)

    By that logic most media consumption is unethical. Almost anything out of a major studio is made with the abuse of, underpayment of, and often even outright theft from small artists. I think a much better solution than not using them is to take all the money they made from it and redistribute it as universal basic income, then make the models 100% free to use. Cat's outta the bag, at this point I just wanna see the little guy get paid.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago

    By that logic most media consumption is unethical. Almost anything out of a major studio is made with the abuse of, underpayment of, and often even outright theft from small artists.

    Now we're on the same track. My goal is if we can't solve these problems entirely, at the least not contribute to the further exploitation and enclosure of our commons.

    This is one of the reasons I think copyright is a dead end — it's a tool of the enemy.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 1 week ago (5 children)

    So you are on the side of binary thinking, in the end. Cool.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago* (4 children)

    What makes you think that? I am on no side. I'm just trying to be objective. Everything I said is factually borne out afaik.

    Also

    you are on the side of

    binary thinking

    Lol now you're just playing with me, very funny ;p

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 1 week ago* (3 children)

    You thought you were being subtle but if your response to an extremist viewpoint is "yes they make a good point" you're not getting it but you do seem to want to definitely take a side.

    "I'm just being objective but your point isn't worth addressing while the thought process you take issue with is totally valid"

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    I'm not trying to be subtle, I'm trying to be open. Clearly we've each got our opinions and I think I've been very upfront with mine. You're right I don't think being against this technology qualifies as an "extremist" position anymore then being against cloud computing or Nvidia are extreme takes.

    Anyway you didn't even try me. I'm elsewhere in this thread talking about the legitimate uses for LLMs. Not everything is as black vs white, clanker vs luddite, as you're making it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    "Asbestos is extremely toxic" and "asbestos can be useful and irreplacable at times" are both true. So are "lead is poisonous" and "tetraetillead is an effective anti-knocking agent, lead in solder stops tin whiskers from forming, and lead paint is pretty".

    Also that's how racism got normalized again, after getting closer to putting it back into the cemetery of history. And so is every LGBTQ+-phobia you can name. Or even better: the tobacco industry, the alcohol industry, and the gambling industry all promote "responsible use" of their products.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] -2 points 1 week ago

    I think LLM is more like weed though, if we are making an apt metaphor.

    MJ is useful in many ways, has medically recognized therapeutic benefits, is fun recreationally. But, it is unadvised to habitually use it all day, and can be harmful if you do.

    For both LLMs and marijuana it's not the use of it that is bad, because there are positives, it's the over use and abuse of it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    Using it as a tool to speed up your own work is completely different from passing off its work as yours or using it to do someone else’s work

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 1 week ago (8 children)

    Because utilitarians are amoral. In fact, the AI ethics "intellectuals" are usually utilitarians, as seen with "Longtermism" and "Effective Altruism."

    You need to realize that your stance is not going to be enough.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 week ago* (7 children)

    But utilitarianism is a moral system. How can it be amoral...? Its by definition a moral system. You could put fort the argument that it can sometimes reach immoral conclusions, but calling it amoral is just... mixing things up at best and being disingenuous at worse.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 1 week ago* (2 children)

    V5rhWYRIOpZBUrk.webp

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago* (2 children)

    Pointing to a moral horizon in the future where things "balance out" is a tool to dismiss moral distinctions in the current, lived context.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    Are you seriously considering people on the internet should start acknowledging nuance? Smh.

    I just want to be angry and right - and personally insult you; even though I know nothing about you outside of a sentence or two that I just read.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
    • [–] 21 points 1 week ago (5 children)

    Gonna copy pasta one of my previous comments because it's relevant again:

    I’m going to argue that how you use the lying machine determines if it’s slop, not if you use it.

    “Generate a character profile for Alexander the blacksmith.” Slop.

    “Ask me questions about Alexander the blacksmith so I can further develop his character.” Not slop.

    “Summarize everything I explained about Alexander the blacksmith in the format of a wiki article.” Could be slop, might not be, depends on how diligent you were about not letting the lying machine have creative control. Needs to be reviewed for accuracy of course.

    And for the record, I was a DM for years before generative ai was a thing. Running a campaign is ton of work, even with shortcuts. Don’t insult your DM like this.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 week ago

    I’m going to argue that how you use the lying machine determines if it’s slop, not if you use it

    Which is ironic of Lemmy to agree with OP because it is also here in Lemmy, where i learned about making the correct prompt to get the best out of AI!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 4 days ago* (1 child)

    Can we take a moment to acknowledge that we're debating which uses for the natural-gas-powered, impoverished-community-polluting, job-destroying, data-mining, genocide-funding nightmare machine are acceptable and our sole criterion is the degree to which we allow it to replace our creativity?

    And that the threshold is not zero?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • [–] 5 points 1 week ago

    But like... in a bad way.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 4 points 1 week ago

    I just use DDG image search. Started drawing a bit recently and use online images as a starting point sometimes.

    Planning on carving a board game on a wooden board, same rules as the game of Ur but possibly going with a different theme for decorating the board. Anglo-Saxon runes, axes and round shields. Been drawing them on paper as a planning stage and to practice as I would draw the outline on wood before carving it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 4 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    I'm alright with that, as long as I can wear a chicken costume.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • [–] 7 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    Why use lot thought when few thought do trick?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • [–] 6 points 1 week ago (16 children)

    Why do they only draw the unicorns female. I’ve never seen unicorn dong.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 16 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    That's because you're unattractive to unicorns.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 1 week ago (5 children)

    That's not a unicorn. It's a whatever Pegasus is.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

    Why do they only draw the pegasuses pterippi female. I’ve never seen pegasus pterippi dong.

    Edit: s/pegasus/pterippus/, and also in researching the correct terminology I have now seen Pegasus dong. I did not want to see that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago (5 children)

    if you'd like to change that, e621 has tons of examples.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 1 week ago (3 children)

    Oh my. You weren't kidding. I searched unicorn and yeah, teems of examples.

    Also interesting...Lots of examples of furry art with equine-anatomically-correct dong. Animal genitals on anthos is a common red line for platforms that are furry-tolerant but not furry-friendly.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    I fucking love e621, almost anything is allowed, and if you don't want to see something then just put that tag in your blocklist. The tagging system is robust as fuck, and bad tagging (like you'd see on literally every other platform) is socially unacceptable.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
    • [–] 3 points 1 week ago

    Hehe, Guzzetta.

    ("guz" in my language is "butt cheek", "guza" is "butt")

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    load more comments
    view more: next ›
    1 comment in c/fuck_ai@lemmy.world view that post