Nope, we all lived just fine without farming and fishing. Then we lived just fine without industrial farming and fishing. We lived most of human existence without either, and certainly without modern medicine.
You just like those things and you don’t like AI.
Then you dress all AI applications down to “AI slop”. Which if you want to move the goalposts to “AI slop”, we can agree that it’s about as necessary as high fructose corn syrup and streaming entertainment. Do you fuss on those as hard as frivolous AI usage?
@Nouvellalia@7101334 funny how really the only argument AI boosters can make with regards to its environmental impact is “what about all the other stuff that is worse”. What about it? What about that? Look over there! Yes I’ve been concerned about all those things, for many years, because I’ve been concerned about climate change, for many years. You haven’t?
AI energy usage is not an “ai problem”. Rancid oligarchs and zombie corpos should not be allowed to pillage from our air, water, and soil. Attacking ai specifically for this solves nothing. I’m saying “let’s hard shut down the rot” and what are you? Schoolyard bullying me because you hate ai specifically? You are the one employing distraction tactics, trying to bandaid a fatal wound inflicted by a ravenous system of exploitation.
“Rancid oligarchs and zombie corpos should not be allowed to pillage from our air, water, and soil. Attacking ai specifically for this solves nothing.”
And what does defending and promoting “AI” (which is a marketing lie since there is no intelligence involved) do to prevent oligarchs and corpos from pillaging our natural resources?
Follow this chain back up. You had a knee jerk reaction to the word “ai”, gamgam. I’m saying “AI shouldn’t be given to corporations and governments for them to use exclusively. It should be open source and given back to the people.”
And stop tagging people. You look silly. I know when you’ve replied.
@Nouvellalia aw look at you, complaining about being bullied by gamgam. That’s adorable.
>It should be open source and given back to the people.”
What should be open source? Machine learning to detect cancer? Absolutely. Generative CSAM? How about no? By failing to distinguish between the different things lumped under the marketing lie that’s is “AI,” you promote and defend Grok, ChatGPT, Claude, etc.
Re: tagging people: that’s my handle. I’m accessing Lemmy via my Mastodon account, the software does that automatically.
They’re also necessary for existence (at least the first two, but when it comes to medical applications, really electricity too).
AI slop? Nope.
re: your 1st point: deliberately disingenuous due to scale and time. re: your 2nd point: No
I promise we won’t need shitty images of babies driving a boat with shrimp Jesus, no matter how much time passes.
Nope, we all lived just fine without farming and fishing. Then we lived just fine without industrial farming and fishing. We lived most of human existence without either, and certainly without modern medicine.
You just like those things and you don’t like AI.
Then you dress all AI applications down to “AI slop”. Which if you want to move the goalposts to “AI slop”, we can agree that it’s about as necessary as high fructose corn syrup and streaming entertainment. Do you fuss on those as hard as frivolous AI usage?
lmao that’s actually so stupid I’m not even going to bother responding
@Nouvellalia @7101334 funny how really the only argument AI boosters can make with regards to its environmental impact is “what about all the other stuff that is worse”. What about it? What about that? Look over there! Yes I’ve been concerned about all those things, for many years, because I’ve been concerned about climate change, for many years. You haven’t?
AI energy usage is not an “ai problem”. Rancid oligarchs and zombie corpos should not be allowed to pillage from our air, water, and soil. Attacking ai specifically for this solves nothing. I’m saying “let’s hard shut down the rot” and what are you? Schoolyard bullying me because you hate ai specifically? You are the one employing distraction tactics, trying to bandaid a fatal wound inflicted by a ravenous system of exploitation.
@Nouvellalia
“Rancid oligarchs and zombie corpos should not be allowed to pillage from our air, water, and soil. Attacking ai specifically for this solves nothing.”
And what does defending and promoting “AI” (which is a marketing lie since there is no intelligence involved) do to prevent oligarchs and corpos from pillaging our natural resources?
Follow this chain back up. You had a knee jerk reaction to the word “ai”, gamgam. I’m saying “AI shouldn’t be given to corporations and governments for them to use exclusively. It should be open source and given back to the people.”
And stop tagging people. You look silly. I know when you’ve replied.
@Nouvellalia aw look at you, complaining about being bullied by gamgam. That’s adorable.
>It should be open source and given back to the people.”
What should be open source? Machine learning to detect cancer? Absolutely. Generative CSAM? How about no? By failing to distinguish between the different things lumped under the marketing lie that’s is “AI,” you promote and defend Grok, ChatGPT, Claude, etc.
Re: tagging people: that’s my handle. I’m accessing Lemmy via my Mastodon account, the software does that automatically.