• UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    9 months ago

    This is what I learnt on Lemmy. Not all people who agree with your position have arrived there logically. (In my case, this position would be leftist ideals). People who you share the same values with are not exempt from being illogical.

    New tech leads to scammers pouncing on it to make a quick buck. However, just because scammers pounce on it doesn’t make the tech bad inherently.

    See Lemmy’s hate for AI for instance. The advancements in the field of machine learning are mind boggling. Lemmings unfortunately fail to disassociate the tech from the scammers who talk about this tech. It’s disappointing, but oh well… ¯⁠\⁠_⁠(⁠ツ⁠)⁠_⁠/⁠¯

    • itsmect@monero.town
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      AI has the potential to become a tool which strongly favors and benefits the ruling class. Us peasants get the locked down version, while government agencies get to use the full power for cyber warfare and disinformation campaigns, and large corpos get to manipulate (“advertise”) to you in most manipulative way to act in their best interest.

      The way I see it good people shy away form using AI, leaving only the assholes wielding their new would powers. Those with ill intentions will find ways to use it, no matter how many laws you put up to prevent it. To defend yourself the best approach would be to learn how to use AI yourself, so that you can detect and react when AI is used against your best interests.

      Does this make me pro or con AI? I honestly don’t know. Maybe complex things are never that black and white to begin with.

      • UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        Agreed completely. Usage of AI is a political issue. The tech can be used both for the good and bad. However, just because it can be used for the bad doesn’t make the tech bad.

        Development in nuclear science made a bomb that could end civilisation. It also gave us a pathway to solve climate change. How we use the tech should be an issue. The tech itself shouldn’t be.

    • pancakes@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      9 months ago

      You’re either arguing in bad faith or just ignorant if you think those are the actual issues with crypto and AI.

      Most people dislike crypto due to the severe negative environmental impact it has on the world. We are literally on the precipice of global warming fucking everything up for us and some greedy motherfuckers decide they need to reinvent something that isn’t broken, and has yet to show a single viable use case that can’t be matched with traditional methods.

      As for AI, are you defending the plagiarism machine or the art theft machine? I just fail to see how stealing writer’s and artist’s livelihoods to create a dystopian society where creative expression is replaced by soulless machines is a good thing. There is a world where this isn’t a negative, however in this late-stage capitalism world we live in, artists and writers are being layed off in exchange for AI.

      Honestly the real disappointment here is you.

      • UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Most people dislike crypto due to the severe negative environmental impact it has on the world.

        I dislike cryptocurrencies for the same reason. I never said I support them. However, I like the tech behind blockchains. I believe that there are legitimate use cases for blockchains. There are many different implementations of blockchains that circumvent proof of work (the environment damaging thing).

        As for AI, are you defending the plagiarism machine or the art theft machine? I just fail to see how stealing writer’s and artist’s livelihoods to create a dystopian society where creative expression is replaced by soulless machines is a good thing. There is a world where this isn’t a negative, however in this late-stage capitalism world we live in, artists and writers are being layed off in exchange for AI.

        Again, I agree with you. Capitalism sucks. AI and capitalism combined suck even more. However, this does not make the tech behind AI inherently bad. As you said, there is a world where this isn’t bad. There is a world where advancements in AI can be put to very very good use. I want to see that world. This is why I support (and have contributed to) the development of open sourced AI models. I want public ownership over models. While open sourced doesn’t exactly mean this, it’s the closest that we can get to it.

        Honestly the real disappointment here is you.

        Sick burn brah… I need some ice for that burn brah

      • itsmect@monero.town
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        I don’t use AI to copy other peoples work. I use AI as a better search engine for obscure topics where I don’t know the right keywords. Describe your issue in cleartext, and out comes enough info to migrate to a better search. I’ve also used AI to modify my own works, ie. “blur out the background of this image” or “remove object from image”.

        When people argue in favor of traditional banking because they are more “environmental friendly”, I really have to ask who is arguing ion bad faith. Aren’t credit cards a thing because banks know that given the chance people will consume more then they can afford? They are the one complicit in our consumerist culture, which arguably places a much higher burden on the environment. But the calculation is much broader then comparing the power consumption of ATMs with crypto networks, so it’s easy to sweep that part under the rug.

        • UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          Well technically you could also have crypto banks which pull the same shit. The advantage of blockchains is better security and integrity.

          • itsmect@monero.town
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            9 months ago

            Well their can not be uncapped fractional lending as it is right now. The bank could offer a credit card equivalent, but it would need an equal amount of deposits. The current system works by essentially crediting the merchant an IOU, whose value does not have to be real. With crypto merchants get to choose, would they rather have native crypto, or an IOU with strings and contracts attached? Obviously the latter is more risky, and therefor the seller has to factor it into the price/ transaction fee.

            Maybe that can be somehow circumvented too. But it certainly is more difficult then the meddling that happens right now.

            • UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              9 months ago

              Yeah I guess u’r right. Fractional lending rn is very important for monetary policy. And monetary policy is VERY IMPORTANT. But I could see a completely digital currency having good monetary policies without interest rates and fractional reserves. Perhaps, a simple gas fee increase/decrease could work. I dunno, I’m too tired rn lol