Well, I’m on Lemmy myself, so perhaps that’s some sort of an indication of where I prefer to discuss thing with people in general, not just about AI. My list of blocked users is rather vast though, so a big part of the loudest haters are being filtered out from my feed. That surely contributes to the better experience here - or atleast less bad.

Definitely prefered it over there at reddit, but I’m a man of principle so I’m not going back either.

Well I’d say that for a person to be evil they’d need to be doing evil things with the sole intention of causing harm with nothing good coming out of it. Perhaps a good caricature of an evil person would be someone wanting to destroy the world including themselves. Admittedly such people absolutely does exists so maybe that debunks my own claim.

However if someone draws joy from causing harm to others I wouldn’t still call it evil but more like extreme disregard; you don’t care how others feel, only how it makes you feel. This is why I don’t think billionaires abusing the system for their own benefit makes them evil because causing harm is a byproduct of their selfish goals but not the intention of them. Similarly someone like Hitler wasn’t evil either because causing suffering to the jews was not the reason he set up the death camps but rather a way to achieve his other goals.

No, but probably the dedicated subreddit

I couldn’t think of a worse platform to try and discuss this topic than Lemmy. The consensus here is essentially that big companies = bad, AI companies = big, and thus AI = bad.

…is how generative-AI haters redefine terms and move the goalposts to fight their cognitive dissonance.

Well first of all, I don’t personally think evil even exists.

Secondly, I don’t think these people are any more or less “evil” than the rest of us. They just operate on a much larger scale that affects many more people. If any of us normal folk would be put under equivalent level of scrutiny as these guys with journalists combing thru our every social media post and paparazzis following us around combined with the intention to dig up dirt and contribute to the negative narrative that sells better than a positive one, we’d all look like them. Most people don’t like Gates, Musk or Zuck because that’s the conclusion they’ve independently arrived at. It’s how they’ve been told to think by the media.

To be honest I’d feel stupid saying that alout at anyone. They’re not called that in my native language - I think.

Both spoons are the same size. Different size ones wouldn’t fit together like that.

It only sounds bad to the fringest of the fringe that’s deceivingly loud on twitter. Good luck trying to find even one real person thinking those terms should be changed. This kind of stuff is why people vote for Trump.

Advertisements are for a large part about brand recognization. Even if you’re not going to buy the product, the fact that you remember the brand means the ad has worked.

By using Lemmy we’re already filtering out certain people and opinions. I personally think that the more control we have over what we see, the better. I don’t think it’s opposing views people want to filter out. It’s the ones having those views and being dicks about it.

My 10 year old TV which I watch 10 year old TV-series via HDMI from? I don’t think so.

Tomorrow there’s going to be article about how my car spies on me as if that’s not 15 years old too. Or something about my office job that I don’t have.

I’m becoming irrelevant. Not the target audience for anything.

Unavoidably so but then again, going sideways because of a downvote is just more data on who you might want to block.

Echo chamber within echo chamber I guess.

It’s not the people whose opinions I disagree with who I usually block. It’s people making snide comments like this while fishing for upvotes. I’ll reserve my attention to the ones who have something to say rather than ones just wanting to make noise.

If this mean we’d be able to see who has up- / downvoted a comment on our own and possibly on other people’s posts then I’m all for it. This would be highly useful at filtering out the people here I want nothing to do with.

Musk really fucked everything up, did he?

Other than no longer being able to use an app to access twitter, I haven’t noticed anything else changing for the worse. They even made the “media” tab into grid rather than list which was a welcome update.

AI will be only be able to produce art that already exists or realism.

Well, that is not true at all.

Generative AI isn’t just limited to imitating or copying existing art. It’s fully capable of creating original pieces, much like humans do. Sure, AI models learn from large datasets of existing art, but that doesn’t mean they’re limited to mere copying. Instead, they take these inputs, find patterns, blend concepts, and can then generate something entirely new. This isn’t too different from how human artists operate. They too absorb influences from the world and other pieces of art and generate new ones based on that. Nobody is creating art in a vacuum.

The additional benefit AI has is not being tied down by existing concepts. Human creativity often gets shaped by cultural trends or personal experiences, but AI can step outside those constraints, giving us a fresh take on art and creativity in ways that many human artists can’t. Not to even mention that you need a human in the loop to write the prompt. AI doesn’t create art alone no more than a paint brush does.

Good demonstration of how the alternatives are no better

Ukraine struggles to repel the constant attacks on the eastern front so by attacking Russia in the north, it forces them to move troops from elsewhere thus making them to stop the attacks due to lack of manpower and go on defence instead. This eases the pressure on the Ukrainian defenders.

This newly acquired land is also something they can use to trade back parts of their own land if and when the peace negotitations start.

It also further diminishes the credibility of the Russian army and leadership.

The first time I saw text written by GPT it all seemed alright at first glance but once you started to actually read it was immediately obvious it had no idea what it was talking about. It was grammatically correct nonsense.