Actually I don’t have to be ok with anyone contributing to the burning down of the planet. I feel like adults should have a better understanding of morality than simply “its against the rules and is therefore wrong”.
AI is not going anywhere. It’s proved its use. We can limit its ability to be used by people, and we can put brakes on how much energy can be spent on training models, but it’s not like we can un-create what we spent the last 15 years creating. The marginal cost of using an AI once trained is negligible. This is different from, say, driving a gas-powered car with the argument “the oil’s already been extracted from the earth, might as well use it.” Using an AI does not directly contribute to climate change. Supporting unethical AI companies may, though.
The real problem is that we are using non-green power sources. My area uses hydro, wind, and solar, so AI run and trained here has no climate impact.
No man what are you doing! We already used the “well actually it’s bad because uhhh climate change” argument against cryptocurrencies, you can’t double-dip like! When you hate on AI you’re supposed to use the “but it’s plagiarism” argument! Everyone knows that!
We are literally putting our means of expressing ourselves into the hands of a few people. So once they just decide that cats are now not allowed, no one will be able to create memes about cats
You are fueling a machine that google is selling to the genocide in Gaza.
You will never be able to create new things. Since an AI only has relatively few nodes that are random (so it can output different things when given the same input) let’s say about 10% of your picture is actually new, and the rest plagiarised. You could just input that again and make it more random, but inputting something AI generated into an AI just makes it shit itself, it will not be „random” like an artist thinks about making a new way of expressing themselves”,but random as in „let’s just expose a drive to extreme radiation and see what the data looks like after 1000 bitflips
The data collection. If a normal human collected that much data about me I could just sue them for stalking
There’s actually quite a few models that can run easily on a mid-range gaming computer (yes even for image generation, and yes they can run reasonably well) which…that same energy would probably be consumed by gaming so not really a huge difference.
Whoa there buddy the post was talking about image generators, which run OK on consumer (albeit high-end) hardware. You’re the one who brought up LLMs.
And how can google track me if it’s a thing running locally? Just pass --network=none to the docker container lol. Even then you’re arguably giving google more useful data by using gmail than any of their AI services. Do you go after every gmail user telling them that they’re supporting genocide? As for your fifth point, gauging whether or not something is original art by the permutation space of the medium is reductive. Is a base guitar less expressive than a harp because the musician is limited by the number of strings? Humans make art for many reasons, and one of those reasons is because its fun. Drawing with pencils can be fun, painting can be fun, writing prompts can be fun. People will keep on having AI art competitions because it’s fun while you’re sitting there in the corner seething about how all of them are genocide supporters. inb4 ad hominem, but honestly you sound insufferable.
Actually I don’t have to be ok with anyone contributing to the burning down of the planet. I feel like adults should have a better understanding of morality than simply “its against the rules and is therefore wrong”.
I think most people don’t really develop moral reasoning past “I don’t want to get punished” or, if you’re lucky, “it’s against the rules.”
AI is not going anywhere. It’s proved its use. We can limit its ability to be used by people, and we can put brakes on how much energy can be spent on training models, but it’s not like we can un-create what we spent the last 15 years creating. The marginal cost of using an AI once trained is negligible. This is different from, say, driving a gas-powered car with the argument “the oil’s already been extracted from the earth, might as well use it.” Using an AI does not directly contribute to climate change. Supporting unethical AI companies may, though.
The real problem is that we are using non-green power sources. My area uses hydro, wind, and solar, so AI run and trained here has no climate impact.
No man what are you doing! We already used the “well actually it’s bad because uhhh climate change” argument against cryptocurrencies, you can’t double-dip like! When you hate on AI you’re supposed to use the “but it’s plagiarism” argument! Everyone knows that!
OK then
Just run your AI models locally? Problem solved lol.
So you want to buy me and every about like 10 million people a server that can run a halfway good LLM Model and pay the electric bills?
Also it dosent change any point except 2
There’s actually quite a few models that can run easily on a mid-range gaming computer (yes even for image generation, and yes they can run reasonably well) which…that same energy would probably be consumed by gaming so not really a huge difference.
Microsoft even just released an open weights LLM that runs entirely on CPU that is comparable to the big hosted ones people are paying for
Edit: just saw what community I’m in, so my comment was probably not appropriate for the community
The electric bills would not be high (per person) jsyk. It’d be comparable to playing a video game when in use.
No, that sounds expensive
It does actually
OK, so you just want everyone to just pull 20k out of their ass to buy themselves hardware to run a LLM on?
Tell me how.
Whoa there buddy the post was talking about image generators, which run OK on consumer (albeit high-end) hardware. You’re the one who brought up LLMs.
And how can google track me if it’s a thing running locally? Just pass
--network=noneto the docker container lol. Even then you’re arguably giving google more useful data by using gmail than any of their AI services. Do you go after every gmail user telling them that they’re supporting genocide? As for your fifth point, gauging whether or not something is original art by the permutation space of the medium is reductive. Is a base guitar less expressive than a harp because the musician is limited by the number of strings? Humans make art for many reasons, and one of those reasons is because its fun. Drawing with pencils can be fun, painting can be fun, writing prompts can be fun. People will keep on having AI art competitions because it’s fun while you’re sitting there in the corner seething about how all of them are genocide supporters. inb4 ad hominem, but honestly you sound insufferable.