I want all the money I put in to be refunded in nonsequential bills, and give it to me in one of those fancy metal briefcases please.

  • Wanpieserino@lemm.eeBanned from community
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    6 months ago

    No, fucking ridiculous people that are against productivity increases.

    Holy fuck, you’re the type that destroyed machines because they took your job

      • Wanpieserino@lemm.eeBanned from community
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        14
        ·
        6 months ago

        Then why are there so many people generating images with AI hahahahhahaa

        Make it make sense, there’s clearly a huge amount of demand for the production

        • hihi24522@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          6 months ago

          Yes there is demand for art, but art is produced by people.

          AI is only able to do what it can by mimicking the art of others. By plagiarizing that work, it prevents artists from getting paid to create art and discourages people from creating and sharing art on the internet in the first place. You may not care about them, or value creativity, but image generation relies on creative people putting new artwork on the net.

          What are your bots going to create when they have nothing to feed on but themselves?

          That’s the fun upside to the internet becoming filled and killed with AI slop: AI companies are literally poisoning their own models. (Data poisoning that is)

          Predictive models of any kind produce error, and when you train on predicted data you compound that error.

          Unless AI scrapers can differentiate AI generated “art” from human generated art (which would mean that AI art never truly becomes indistinguishable-from or as-good-as human art, something techbros and idiots would be upset about), generative AI will eat its own tail in an oddly literal sense.

          The more the web fills with slop, the more AI will train on it, and the worse and worse the models will get at generating good looking images, leading the images they produce (and the ones they inevitably train on) to decrease in quality, hastening the cycle of their own degradation.

              • Wanpieserino@lemm.eeBanned from community
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                6 months ago

                It will improve because we’re investing a major amount into it.

                Decades ago, the same happened with the internet.

                Guess where we’re communicating on.

                • LeninsOvaries@lemmy.cafeBanned from community
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  Are you gonna teach it to use logical reasoning to make better artistic choices, or just copy better artists even more?

        • skisnow@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          6 months ago

          There isn’t, though. Every time AI gets posted the response is always like this.

          People love being able to create stuff without making an effort, but NOBODY likes having soulless low-effort crap flooding their feeds unbidden.

    • Maxxie@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      6 months ago

      We gotta increase the productivity of meme generation, obviously.

      Also the productivity of eating, socializing, and fucking. Those items really make my life a drag, can we get chatgpt on that.

    • rowdyrockets@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      6 months ago

      I work on machines all day grumpy pants. They’re literally my job.

      I’m not against AI, I’m against AI art. What we see here isn’t a productivity increase because it isn’t productive. Stay mad though, they say it’s good for your health.

      • Wanpieserino@lemm.eeBanned from community
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        So, what we see here. is not produced? I guess I’m just hallucinating? Damn, AI is quite the drug.

        Yeah you’re using machines, I’m using AI.

        Edit: I’m obviously referring to the early 1800s when people lost their jobs because of the industrial revolution

    • festnt@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      6 months ago

      i’m sorry that you’re the type of person that sees a copyright infringement machine with no creativity and thinks that’s good because you can spend more time being productive.

      i’m sorry that you’re the type of person that would see an offer for an AI that can automatically shorten any message sent to you, and think it’s good because you can understand what the person meant faster and you can respond quicker, and think that’s good because you can spend more time being productive.

      i’m sorry that you’re the type of person that will never understand what it means to learn and create art, talk with friends, spend time with loved ones, all in the name of spending more time being productive.

    • homicidalrobot@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      I’d like to remind you the luddites were the people who knew how to use the automatic looms. They were the primary people working with the machines, mostly, they didn’t lose their jobs.