NOTE: I am NOT defending AI or it’s usage or anything like that. So just tie that horse right back up at the kitchen sink. I don’t like the whole AI thing. This post is not about AI.
I get that it was necessary at first, but now whenever there’s any hint of AI, there’s a great chorus of everyone saying the same thing ‘AI slop bla bla bla’ like a gaggle of sheep jerking their knees.
It’s not fucking helpful. It only sows even more division among the peasants, while the oligarchs take zero notice and continue on as usual. The correct way to engage with AI content you don’t like is just not at all.
Examples:
Recently I watched as a post for a community event was removed, because it had an AI image. The image was not requested or created by the organiser, it was provided to them, and had information in several languages. But the post was removed because AI slop and now there is less human connection happening. Yay. Well fucking done. You literally are helping the AI overlords now.
I’ve seen many actual legit digital artists getting hit with the cries of AI slop and even banned, when they have been making art for years before AI was even a thing. People actually can’t tell the difference half the time when they think they can, and end up hurting real artists.
Now is not the time to be attacking each other over using AI to generate some stupid meme. There are much, MUCH bigger issues at stake right now, and calling everything AI slop does nothing to help.
/rant
What the flog is wrong with having AI make a poster as long as it’s reasonably clean, professional, and free of slop content? Indeed, much of what AI can do in those situations is little more than automation acting on PhotoShop-like sets of tools.
Make all the AI content you want, says I, but here’s a tip-- don’t make it obvious that AI was used in its production. Bam, problem solved.
This is whats wrong with it
Now if you could put that in to your own words…
EDIT: To the enlightened downvoters-- that person’s trying to get me to read a 5,000pp science paper instead of answering themselves.
Nah you obviously dont care enough to read it so I’m good
GTFO. That’s a ~5,000pp science paper. You want me to try to read and understand all that instead of you doing the simple of thing of using your own words to convey your point?
Fuck off, troll.
Nah, they’re right and you’re wrong here.
The thing about long papers is they generally have an abstract right upfront that’ll bottom line all ~5000 pages in a few paragraphs.
Your responses make it obvious that you already know exactly what point they were making and you’re being deliberately obtuse because you don’t like the point being made.
Please.
That is an actual science paper in an area in which I have zero academic training and little familiarity with the relevant terminology, how that field quantifies things, and a bazillion other concerns. Sure, I might be able to spend a day’s worth of my time struggling to understand the relevant point of the paper and guessing at WTF the other commenter was wanting me to mind read, but what’s the point?
If you’re too much of a tongue-tied freak to give a straight answer, and instead throw out some science paper and expect someone else to absorb it and guess at whatever your original point was, then… you might just be an idiot.
And I’ve already answered concerns about AI energy consumption in this thread chain, so maybe instead of trying to ride a troll’s lack of effort, you could actually read the thread?
Yeah, good luck with that. Later, tater.
Not that I could find, including looking through your comment history in case I was missing it.
But unless your “answer” includes some peer reviewed science (like the paper you steadfastly refuse to read since you know it’ll prove you wrong) it’s not an answer so much as an excuse, or maybe even just a vibe.
Good on you for piping up with your alt. Got it tagged now, thanks.
Haha calm down man its not that deep, you can get the gist by even just skim reading it instead of writing paragraphs of text to alleged trolls
Lmao the pro AI guy being too lazy to skim a paper for information is too on the nose. It’s in 4.1 Median Model Energy Consumption.
The issue is that it’d take hundreds of times less energy to just put together something yourself, not to mention the massive energy cost of training the models in the first place. Plus you’d be developing a skill while doing creative work, which is great for your brain.
What “pro AI guy”?
I’m someone who’s repeatedly voiced my deep distrust of an AI-centered future, and by no means trusts in data centers. My use-case is on the extreme lower end of the spectrum, so what appropriate rebuttal is there for that?
If it uses one of the online services, then it’s a problem (environment, water etc).
You could somewhat make that argument for local models. But not many people are going to have any conception of that
Metrics are needed. Based on an article that Rimu shared a few days ago, I didn’t get the impression that stuff like simple graphics work needed for a poster particularly added much strain.
There’s also the simple fact that it’s too late to be herding cats on this one. Most people who’ve gotten used to using AI for various tasks aren’t going to give it up very easily. While I agree that it can be useful to talk up and spread the word about the destructiveness of AI costs, that energy and pressure ultimately needs to be funneled to lawmakers in order to draft and pass appropriate legislation.
100% agree
It’s also an issue that every person that complains about AI has absolutely no fucking idea what it is, how it works, how to differentiate different models/forms, or even why it’s a special unique technology that is inherently bad. Unlike things like alcohol, X-rays, methamphetamines, gunpowder, oil, nuclear, mining, farming, etc, etc, that are only harmful when used/done wrong.
I don’t understand how that could be at this point, but it would help explain the paranoia. To me, there’s a huge difference between a simple, clean, low-cost use-case in which little or no trace of AI tools is detected, versus obvious AI slop media, versus having an LLM do extensive programming which winds up being filled with spaghetti code and whatever inefficiencies. The latter two involving a tonne more queries and tokens used.
It’s all the same thing to a lot of people, I guess.
Because it has become a purity signal and tribal call rather than an actual coherent position. I’ve seen people get angry at researchers using AI to develop new drugs, and novel bacteriophages. I’ve seen people get angry at “AI” in word processing and image editing, claiming there’s no difference between ChatGPT and the algorithms than have been used for decades.
There is such a idiotic mix-up between the horrible corruption of OpenAI, and the term “AI” itself, that morons with no understanding of anything are waving torches and grabbing pitchforks at the word itself, without any comprehension of what they’re angry at.
Yeah, I guess that pretty-well covers it. Well said!
Not totally sure what you mean, there. I do use GPT a lot for complex searches, rarely anything else.
The large LLM companies really are doing some pretty shady shit. Loans on loans on loans (the bubble everyone is talking about). Shredding and destroying old books after scanning for training. Bowing down and supporting the current US administration that is rapidly descending to fascism. Funding the construction of these data super centers that are wrecking absolute havoc on the environment and people around them.
The tool is useful. Many of the companies promoting their models are fucking AWFUL. OpenAI is by far the worst offender, at the moment.