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.

  • lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 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
      ·
      3 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.