Not if you are part of the AI-bros club. There is a reason Marketing agencies insist in using the term Artificial Intelligence.

Unfortunately, this is not common knowledge, as experts and Marketing Agencies explain Machine Learning to the masses by saying that "It looks at the data and learns from it, like a human would", which combined with the name Artificial Intelligence and the other terms, like Neural Networks and Machine Learning can make someone think these things are actually intelligent.

Furthermore, we, humans, can see humanity where there is none. We can see faces where there are no faces, we can empathize with things that aren't even alive. So, when this thing shows up, which is capable of creating somewhat coherent text, people are quick to Anthropomorphize the machine. To add to this, we are also very language focused: If someone is really good with the language they speak, they are usually seen as more intelligent.

And finally, never underestimate tech illiteracy.

If all it takes to be a “real artist” is drawing proficiently

I think you are miss-understanding the argument.

Pro-AI folk say that being anti-AI, as a digital artist, is hypocrisy because you also used a computer. Here it is shown that, despite not using a computer, the artist is still able to create their art, because there is more to the visual arts than the tools you have to make it. This puts rest to the idea that using digital art tools is somehow hypocritical with being against AIGen.

The argumentor is not saying that not knowing how to draw proficiently excludes being an artist. They are just saying that real artist do not need a computer program to create their arts, much like performances or installation artists you mentioned.

It’s not a matter of if “AI” can outperform humans, it’s a matter of if humanity will survive to see that and how long it might take.

You are not judging what is here. The tech you speak of, that will surpass humans, does not exist. You are making up a Sci-Fi fantasy and acting like it is real. You could say it may perhaps, at some point, exist. At that point we might as well start talking about all sorts of other technically possible Sci-Fi technology which does not exist beyond fictional media.

Also, would simulating a human and then forcing them to work non-stop count as slavery? It would. You are advocating for the creation of synthetic slaves... But we should save moral judgement for when that technology is actually in horizon.

AI is a bad term because when people hear it they start imagining things that don't exist, and start operating in the imaginary, rather than what actually is here. Because what is here cannot go beyond what is already there, as is the nature of the minimization of the Loss Function.

Oops, just wanted to write a quick comment but it evolved into me giving some of my thoughts on AI gen as a means of artistry. Oh well, not deleting this now.

I’m still waiting for someone to make art that requires machine learning and is obviously creative by our standards, instead of using AI to recreate old art.

Most self proclaimed AI artists just type a prompt, maybe do a bit of "prompt engineering" (Read: putting the name of a good artist on the prompt) and then in-paint (Read: re-prompting, but only affects a specific area). That does not give you enough control over the drawing to do anything interesting.

I say this from personal experience. Even small differences is facial expressions, too small to be described with words, can make a big impact. The no. reason artists don't use AI and dislike it is because it doesn't given enough control over the final image, because it does not let them put in details which cannot be described through words. You might say we might someday have an AI that (somehow) gives you more control, but that would nullify the whole "advantage" of AI: Not having to spend time worrying about the details. If you are going to spend 4 hours prompting in details... you could have just gotten a better result by just drawing it yourself.

Think of it like making a level in Mario Maker VS making a game in a game engine. Sure, making things in Mario Maker is faster than making a game yourself, but it doesn't give you the same fine grain control that making a game from scratch would. (But even this is not a perfect analogy has, in Mario Maker you actually get to choose where the blocks go, instead of with AI, where you can only describe how the blocks go and hope the AI gets it right with little hope of editing it yourself.)

Actually, about that "editing it yourself". In this hypothetical AI Mario Maker scenario, you could go into Mario Maker's editor mode and edit the level with the same amount of detail a normal, handcrafted, Mario Maker level would, but with AI image gen, you get the image and... Ya, about has useful as any other downloaded image. Artists typically create layers to do their art thing, but AI output puts everything in one layer, making hard to edit. I could go on this, but I don't have all the time in the world to write this. Someone posted this video on [email protected] , where an AI "artists" quit AI because of these problems of lack of control. (Don't judge me based on the video, I found it on the aforementioned community here (lemmy.ml link))

I know it’s possible to use this tool in a way that’s revolutionary, but the users and developers seem to have little interest in pushing art beyond replacing the artists.

That's the multi billion dollar the AI companies are trying to solve, having to pay wages. The far right loves this as they feel like those who worked hard to develop artistic skills are below them somehow. Part of the conservative rhetoric. AI: The New Aesthetics of Fascism by Gareth Watkins.

I want to see someone develop an original ML model with an original training set that can generate something impossible by any other method.

I feel like people who want talk and argue about AI should know how the training works at a mathematical level. I swear the number of people who act like it's magic is way too much. I say this because it would give you a really good idea of how specialized training won't solve the lack of originality problem. I haven't had a refresher on this so I might be misremembering some things... Any who, this playlist is pretty good I think.

Feel like this belongs in [email protected]

Think I should cross-post?

Have you ever heard of a password manager?

How does this surprise anyone?

LLMs are just pattern recognition machines. You give them a sequence of words and they tell you what is the most statistically likely word to follow based solely on probability, no logic or reasoning.

I've been quietly observing hexbear for a while now and I can tell you with relative certainty that people love to straw man them.

Here is an example:

People say they outright deny the Tiananmen Square Massacre, which is not true. They do believe 300 or so people died in that tragic day. What they do deny, though, is that Tank Man himself was run over by a tank and that people where indiscriminately shot and run over by tanks in the square. They believe the shootout occurred not because China is evil, but because some of the protestors decided it was a good idea to start killing unarmed soldiers.

I'm not going to describe in detail hexbear's timeline of events and evidence for it, because I myself do not fully understand it yet. But it seems this video somewhat explains it well.

People insist time and time again that hexbear users believe the massacre never happened to the point where they can't bother explaining themselves anymore because "what's the point if we are just going to get straw manned?"

People also like to call the massacre a "genocide", which is a massive overstatement. In comparison with the kill count of the holocaust, the death toll of the massacre is a rounding error. I would like to kindly ask people to stop calling it a genocide, as it detracts from the meaning and intensity of the word "genocide" when it is miss used like that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_genocide_theory

Any who, can't wait for people telling how wrong I am for supporting hexbear despite never once saying they were right.

People say they brigade other instances, but that's just because they are very active. In fact, there are one of the most active instances on Lemmy.

This is not to say hexbear users are angels, far from it. They are known to not mix well with other communities, and their site culture can put people off quite a bit, and understandably so. They all also known for their custom emojis, which is a really neat feature their instance has, but they do like to use an emoji depicting a pig defecating as a way of saying "you take is shit", which is rather unpleasant and quite rude of them.

These are just my thoughts on hexbear anyways. I must say I don't really hyper analyze any instance, so I could be somewhat wrong, but I don't really care too much.

NOTE: right now hexbear is using chapo.chat as their temporary fall back domain.

For those who downvoted without reading the link... This whole thing is satire.

The aim of this satirical campaign is to use humour to connect your personal needs for Earth’s resources with the evidence of just how much of these resources are now being claimed for the data centres running generative AI. And to make you smile.

https://savethe.ai/about/

We should probably still allow links to archives/alternative front ends because screenshots of content can be forged. But yeah we should not give those sites more traffic and only link to archives/alternative front ends if necessary.

Why don't you asked them yourself? [email protected]

Probably a bad idea to ask about a Marxist instance on a .world community, since .world is known to be quite biased against Marxism.

I've seen the label "tankie" be thrown around to describe so many different things to the point that it has lost all meaning to me. I've seen it used to describe fascists, I've seen it used as a way to discredit someone's argument without engaging with it, I've seen it used used to invalidate arguments because they were to the left of the person throwing the label.

The definition presented uses the word "authoritarian" which, in my eyes, falls on a similar category of "used on so many things it lost all meaning". (Example)

Using the words authoritarian and communist simultaneously doesn't really make a whole lot of sense to me: As far as I am aware, a communist society is a stateless society. However, Wikipedia defines "authoritarian" as

"Authoritarianism is a political system characterized by the rejection of democracy and political plurality. It involves the use of strong central power to preserve the political status quo, and reductions in the rule of law, separation of powers, and democratic voting."

Notice the words "strong central power". Isn't that a contradiction of what communism is? Please do correct me if I'm wrong.

I've seen in the comments people saying that de-federation is not an option because of .ml's large communities, but, in my eyes, that doesn't make much sense. .world is a big instance, just recreate the communities from .ml that you don't want to miss out on. Everyone on .world will be forced to use them, since they can't post on the .ml version any more. If .ml is as awful as people make it out to be, everyone will de-federate and move to the .world alternatives.