I get the idea, but I don't think there's any real benefit in intentionally muddying the waters further on this stuff. I'm not personally a fan of pouring more fuel on the dumpster fire, and there's been a lot of deep discussions about all of this already. There's not much room for "good faith" discussion in this shit as it is.
wizardbeard 15 points 4 days ago
cattywampus 0 points 4 days ago path: 0 24335520 24335656 24336291, hotness: undefined, score: 0, children: 4
scribbler 3 points 3 days ago
Besides aesthetic, I think the heart of the issue is that those generative AI tools were trained on art made by humans, generally without the consent or payment of said humans. Now you've got an interaction where you want art, you get it from a machine made by an AI company that is effectively ripping off artists, and nowhere in this loop are the artists that made this art generating machine possible.
cattywampus 0 points 3 days ago path: 0 24335520 24335656 24336291 24340656 24340992, hotness: undefined, score: 0, children: 2
fuck_ai
@lemmy.world
7437
4086
8810
"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"
A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.
AI, in this case, refers to LLMs, GPT technology, and anything listed as "AI" meant to increase market valuations.
go to feed...
fuck_ai
@lemmy.world
7437
4086
8810
"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"
A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.
AI, in this case, refers to LLMs, GPT technology, and anything listed as "AI" meant to increase market valuations.
go to feed...
save