Skip Navigation
Ye Power Trippin' Bastards @lemmy.dbzer0.com
Unsung Rooster @sh.itjust.works

Pro-AI mod and self-proclaimed 'communist' got mad for being downvoted.

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/31072292

Summary:

I downvoted pro-AI comments in a post in leftymemes community. It was LLM generated polandball comic (Which is objectively pathetic as fuck) that showed up on my feed, blocked couple of users who I thought were unhinged, and have blocked the whole instance on my client after realizing how rabid these morons are.

I didn't go looking for AI posts like a vigilante.

One user in question got miffed for being downvoted and banned me from places they moderate.

86 comments

  • Upvotes and downvotes aren't a "I like/dislike this" button, they're meant to highlight comments that are contributing positively and constructively to the discussion, showcase insightful comments, or to filter out irrelevant content.

    YDI for misusing the buttons.

  • The entitlement is running strong in those anti-GenAI evangelists, thinking they can just wander into someones home turf and behave like shit, and then complain if there are consequences. YDI

    • To be fair, the typical defenses of that technology are the most maddeningly empty headed shit I've ever read, including conversations with real life fascists and work with people deep into senility.

      Listening to enough of them has genuinely given me a substantial vein of anti human 'most of this is just unrefrigerated meat, there is no spark of intellect, no consviousness, no beauty to be found here' type thought.

      I wouldn't go into '/stable diffusion fruit' to throw a fit about it, but my first instinct when someone says that tech is good is just straight up assuming, whether its on silicon or meat; the thing im talking to is not a person in any way that matters to me.

      Im occasionally wrong, and have to adjust course, but it has become an unsettling oft confirmed default which i very much resent.

      I just really want to emphasize here:

      this technology is often defended with a stupidity so profound and so stubborn that it has broken the last shreds of my love for humanity, a love for humanity that survived being thrown away onto the street like trash as a child, no small amount of rape abuse life unhoused and tending to those who had suffered so much worse than I. In its place that stupidity has awakened a creeping suspicion that there never was such a thing as 'humanity', and I'm utterly alone in a howling void.

      • I might be able to give you another perspective.

        This technology is the first time that humankind has ever been able to create an interactive snapshot of human culture. Everything thats been written, scanned, drawn has made their mark on those models, and it gives you glimpses in what else there might be in the human cultural space. It's not intelligence, but it's distilled human culture.

        I am very critical about the fact that this technology is mainly in the hands of corporations that want to use it as a cost cutting tool. I am also not a fan that GenAI is pushed into everything just to get sweet investor money. I am far less alarmed about the productivity increases themselves, or about copyrights which are normally only wielded as a weapon by the rich.

        The power consumption argument doesn't even apply here - the generation of those images does not cost more energy than playing a computer game for 2 minutes, is often done on consumer grade hardware (like the one running here now while i type this), and the training of the models is not necessarily very power hungry if done smart (deepseek used a fraction of the power that GPT4o needed). Also, with the massive expansion of solar power generation (we're at the point where the price starts becoming negative at peak solar output) the power itself starts becoming a non-factor.

        Copyrights themselves are a clusterfuck, which is an statement that many artists would agree with. I personally wish for the following (copied from the vote-thread regarding the rule we're discussing):

        I would make a case for creation of datasets by a international institution like the UNESCO. The used data would be representative for world culture, and creation of the datasets would have to be sponsored by whoever wants to create models out of it, so that licencing fees can be paid to creators. If you wanted to make your mark on global culture, you would have an incentive to offer training data to UNESCO.

        I hope i could give you a bit hope in humanity back - there are still idealistic people out there.

  • YDI. I'm sick and tired of you damn .world shitlibs thinking you own the fediverse and everyone has to follow your rules. And when some corner of it doesn't, you come unhinged and resort to bigotry and harassment.

    You lot are literally some of the absolute worst examples of humanity on Lemmy.

86 comments