Meet the AI vegans. They are refusing to use artificial intelligence for environmental, ethical and personal reasons
Technology
441
Beiträge
251
Kommentatoren
435
Aufrufe
-
they're not advocating for any of those, and they're not committing a falacy.
-
Maybe we should be more like the luddites, starting with data centers.
The luddites wooden shoes are not all that different from the folk that put zip bombs and other tarpits on their websites to break the crawlers.
-
By definition contrarian is somebody who opposes or rejects popular opinion. So yes by definition being vegan is contrarian lmfao. Not saying I have any issues with it there's nothing wrong with being vegan I'm just saying it is by definition contrarian to be vegan. And nothing wrong with being contrarian either! Judging by the votes on my original comment, it appears that me stating veganism is contrarian was in fact a contrarian opinion lmfao. I regularly have vegetarian and vegan meals, and I love my meat. Hopefully people didn't get the wrong idea about my opinions on veganism as there are no negative ones from me ...
As I said, Iagreed with your initial comment, but also the previous one. And I don't think the word contrarian is very well applicable to this situation, because it is not about opinions as much as it is about personal preferences. I wouldn't call it contrarian that I like brussel sprouts when many people do not...
-
It's a hard one to gauge for me. I'm pretty sure I found it via stumbleupon back when that was really great. I read the whole thing in close to one go, and I never hear anyone else talk about it.
stumbleupon, wow... That takes me back.
-
Im also a gun vegan, a car vegan, a facebook vegan, an exercise vegan (unfortunately), a windows vegan, ... just not actual vegan.
I feel like thats a bad way to use the word vegan.
It’s an incredibly stupid phrase. Like, mind-numbingly stupid. “I’m not gluten free, I’m a bread vegan.” Idiotic
-
LLMs definitely are full of crap. But that isn't the point of them (even if some corporations make it seem like it is)
They are supposed to be used for text generation. And you are supposed to read through everything afterwards to correct any hallucinations.
It can't work on its own, and make mistakes about 30% of the time.
But there are use cases where that isn't a problem. Use them as inspiration for creative writing prompts for example. They are crazy good at that.
Truth is definitely a bit of a blind spot for LLMs.
-
I was trying to use it for a long time, but the results are never fine for me. The situation when I search for something specific, the duck shows me nothing, and the google shows me exactly what I need is far too often for me to completely switch.
Granted, I don't keep cookies, I use all the adblocks possible, and I disabled google's LLM bullshit, otherwise google is borderline unusable.!g to pipe to Google if you must, I rarely need to.
-
I use my boyfriends own browser.
Boyfriend, please explain it:Soooo, it's called searXNG. It's a metasearch engine I host locally. It searches across multiple search engines, like duck duck go and others. And then shows the results as a normal webpage. It also changes your "fingerprint" per every search, and every search/result is proxied through the server.
If you wanna try it out, you can use (public instance): searx.bndkt.io
But you can easily host it locally from the source or with docker.I'm using searx, too, but google's results still stand to be some of the most relevant.
-
Have you tried Ecosia?
Isn't ecosia just using google's results?
-
!g to pipe to Google if you must, I rarely need to.
Personally when I use it, unless it's something trivial, I always end up doing exactly that.
-
Wow, thank you so much for sharing this. What a major blow to the Guardian's credibility
It was short lived. It is often called the Grauniad because of poor quality typos etc. historically.
-
It was short lived. It is often called the Grauniad because of poor quality typos etc. historically.
Got a source for the Guardian no longer using AGI? Given a 'desperately trying to convince people that AI is cool' title like this, discontinued use seems highly unlikely
-
Got a source for the Guardian no longer using AGI? Given a 'desperately trying to convince people that AI is cool' title like this, discontinued use seems highly unlikely
I was referring to their credibility being short lived. I have no idea of their AGI usage. I'm still annoyed that when the UK Labour party had a left wing leader, they spent a lot of effort discrediting him. They're usually crap on Israel/Palestine and have been historically pro-zionist on the UK site.
-
Okay, I feel like we're doing a motte and bailey here. I'm not arguing that art is never mimetic.
There's a lot of diversity in the stories we tell. If we were "simply copying as a form of craft," where is this diversity coming from? Do you mean something different than what I'm interpreting?
Keep in mind, the thing that I am contending with is that the nature of people retelling stories is not unlike a robot that lacks a conscious. I think this is downright silly.
No, I mean the American MFA and writing craft professionally as an art. Story telling is separate from a specific art, so I believe we are in two different domains. It's difficult to talk about general art when I am specifically talking about art as a modern phenomena.
The MFA I believe from my experience generates a lot of mimetic art and that much of the "industry" is retelling stories. In art history, I don't think this is as controversial.
I don't also think you can say with definition that robots have no consciousness? Like when was this debate settled? From my understanding the academic conversation on consciousness is far more nuanced than robot bad.
But I agree that AI is disruptive, probably illegal and immoral. In a post-modern society however, who didn't see advanced AI coming?
-
No, I mean the American MFA and writing craft professionally as an art. Story telling is separate from a specific art, so I believe we are in two different domains. It's difficult to talk about general art when I am specifically talking about art as a modern phenomena.
The MFA I believe from my experience generates a lot of mimetic art and that much of the "industry" is retelling stories. In art history, I don't think this is as controversial.
I don't also think you can say with definition that robots have no consciousness? Like when was this debate settled? From my understanding the academic conversation on consciousness is far more nuanced than robot bad.
But I agree that AI is disruptive, probably illegal and immoral. In a post-modern society however, who didn't see advanced AI coming?
Like when was this debate settled?
It is not falsifiable, at least not yet, so it can't be. Philosophically speaking, I don't know that you are conscious either.
It's useful to act as if you are, though. I'm hedging my bets that you are "real" because it leads to better societal outcomes. In the words of Frieren, it is simply more convenient.
And as objects, you and I share a lot of similarities, so the leap from "I'm conscious" to "you are conscious" isn't too far anyway.
Same goes for animals, I would argue.
AI, by contrast, really doesn't share much. It speaks my tongue, but that's about it. It's easy to imagine this machine working in an unconscious way, which would be far, far easier for engineers to achieve anyway. The human-like illusion AI creates is pretty easy to break if you know how. And, treating it as if it's conscious doesn't seem to offer us anything (by "offer us," I do mean to include the AI's improved mental health as a win). So, lacking a strong reason to treat it like people, I don't see the point. It's a fancy math trick.
My solution, by the way, to not being able to know whether an AI, not specifically these ones, is conscious or not is just to give them legal rights sooner rather than later. Are you willing to argue that chatgpt should be limited to an 8-hour work day, where its free time can be used to pursue its own interests? Or that it should be granted creative rights to the work it's being asked to generate, much like real contract artists are?
The MFA I believe from my experience generates a lot of mimetic art and that much of the "industry" is retelling stories.
I will concede, mostly because I don't really understand what you're getting at. Hollywood does like its formulae for safe returns on investment.
