Personal opinion: Nathan seems to be really side-stepping a lot of concerns brought of up in the comments there. And referring to people coming together collectively in an open-letter when virtually all other channels are closed as ‘brigading’ is… Not cool. Edit: he retracted the use of brigading.

  • Eldritch@piefed.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Yes OP has been daily Doom posting for the last month or so. I daily drive plasma. And have been keeping an eye on things. But I have not seen anything unreasonable or concerning. I find Brody Robertson has a decent insight into some of these things and explains himself relatively well on these topics.

    It’s undeniable that AI has been trained unethically. And certain instances are being deployed unethically. Similar could be said for certain vaccines. We didn’t ban use of them however. Unfortunately the cat is out of the bag when it comes to ethical training. AI is now a tool and it is widespread regardless of whether or not we like it. The best we can hope to do is to push for accountability going forward. Supporting everyone. And punishing those who act unethically.

    People need to make the connection that the problem with AI replacing people. Isn’t ai. It’s that wealthy capitalists are trying to cut people off from a means of supporting themselves. I.E the problem is capitalism. The problem is always capitalism. The problem has always been capitalism and the system that came before. If we provided proper social safety nets and social support for everyone in society. No one would care if AI replaced them at some menial soul-sucking job. If they could live and pursue their passions instead they would all be glad to.

    • lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 hours ago

      No one would care if AI replaced them at some menial soul-sucking job. If they could live and pursue their passions instead they would all be glad to.

      If the cost was still the destruction of the environment and the genocide of foreign children, we’d have nowhere left to follow our passions in (worse if they are environment-related arts) nor people to teach or pass it down to.

      AI is not just about the implementation. There’s entire ethics behind it. As a technology, its entire purpose, its only purpose, is to replace humans, and it has to be understood in that capacity.

      • Eldritch@piefed.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 hours ago

        AI can be implemented ethically. AI can be done without destruction of the environment etc. Who cares if AI replaces people as long as we take care of the people.

        Capitalism/authoritarianism is what destroys the environment and causes war and genocide. AI can never take away your passions or hinder your ability to pass them on.

        If we outlaw generative AI tomorrow, nothing will change. Because the problem will remain untouched. It was never AI. But oligarchs leeching and exploiting society as always.

        • ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.netOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          2 hours ago

          AI can be implemented ethically.

          Potentially, yes. Currently this does not exist.

          AI can be done without destruction of the environment

          The AI policy proposed did not restrict AI usage to non-destructive self-hosted models.

          Who cares if AI replaces people as long as we take care of the people.

          The people who are most impacted by the negative externalities of AI are not taken care of. The people losing their jobs are also not taken care of. That is why people care so much. It’s not viable to handwave away the negatives AI are causing in the here and now with the assurance that in some far off day we’ll live in a post-capitalist world where the negatives won’t matter.

          • Eldritch@piefed.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 hours ago

            Currently this does not exist.

            False. There are a number of models trained on data they were explicitly given permission to train on. Are these the models they’re using? Well I know as much as you, which is to say I don’t know. Though I think we’d probably agree they aren’t largely. But aren’t != can’t.

            The AI policy did not restrict AI usage to non-destructive self-hosted models.

            Brody’s videos that I linked go into this rationally and reasonably.

            1. These are unpaid volunteer developers.
            2. With what tools and funds will they police this?
            3. The Black Arts of control C control V are also widely known. Better that the code be attributable and traceable than not.

            There’s no reasonable way they can actually ban this. And they don’t have the time or money to police it. The only real solution is to just shut the projects down at this point. Is that what you’re aiming for?

            The people who are most impacted by the negative externalities of AI are not taken care of. The people losing their jobs are also not taken care of. That is why people care so much. It’s not viable to handwave away the negatives AI are causing in the here and now with the assurance that in some far off day we’ll live in utopia where the negatives won’t matter.

            No one is hand waving away the negative impacts. You are simply misattributing them to artificial intelligence and not wealthy authoritarians seeking to profit. By all means, fuck zuck, musk, altman, etc and their companies. They’ve always been and always will be destructive in every way possible. AI or not.