Even if you felt comfortable dismissing the environmental impacts of burning down a rainforest because you were too lazy to Google a picture of a factory fire, GenAI as a technology is morally indefensible at its core, since it is based entirely on theft.
I have seen scores of people defend the theft saying intellectual property is the true crime, etc. And while I agree IP laws are abused by massive conglomerations, GenAI isn’t just stealing from them. It’s stealing from every writer and artist on the planet. Anyone who has ever posted their art online to share with their community has had their art hoovered up by for-profit institutions who then sell it to the masses.
GenAI could only be a morally viable technology if:
A) It didn’t consume an ungodly amount of energy to run it
B) You run a model who’s training data was entirely sourced by you to only include sources that have given permission and are properly compensated (if necessary)
A does not seem likely in the foreseeable future; and while B is possible, the scale of data required for constructing a GenAI model, makes it basically infeasible for the average user.
With all of that said, I think it is valid to conclude the technology of GenAI is just as reprehensible as the morally bankrupt corporations that vend it.
While I do not think the users are inherently bad people did using GenAI, there are much more eco-friendly and less theft-based alternatives that are just as easy; and I think it’s questionable to throw those out the window for the rainforest-burning, plagiarism machine…
Weird stance but okay.
Don’t blame the technology. Blame the capitalism and greed of motherfuckers who abuse it.
The technology sucks too, it creates souless garbage
Fair enough. Your position is yours.
I’m just saying if AI didn’t suck I wouldnt be able to immediately identify that image as AI generated.
Even if you felt comfortable dismissing the environmental impacts of burning down a rainforest because you were too lazy to Google a picture of a factory fire, GenAI as a technology is morally indefensible at its core, since it is based entirely on theft.
I have seen scores of people defend the theft saying intellectual property is the true crime, etc. And while I agree IP laws are abused by massive conglomerations, GenAI isn’t just stealing from them. It’s stealing from every writer and artist on the planet. Anyone who has ever posted their art online to share with their community has had their art hoovered up by for-profit institutions who then sell it to the masses.
GenAI could only be a morally viable technology if: A) It didn’t consume an ungodly amount of energy to run it B) You run a model who’s training data was entirely sourced by you to only include sources that have given permission and are properly compensated (if necessary)
A does not seem likely in the foreseeable future; and while B is possible, the scale of data required for constructing a GenAI model, makes it basically infeasible for the average user.
With all of that said, I think it is valid to conclude the technology of GenAI is just as reprehensible as the morally bankrupt corporations that vend it.
While I do not think the users are inherently bad people did using GenAI, there are much more eco-friendly and less theft-based alternatives that are just as easy; and I think it’s questionable to throw those out the window for the rainforest-burning, plagiarism machine…
If you really think AI is only generating shitty pictures, you’re gonna be in for a really bad time and might as well live in the woods now.
I hate a lot of AI today. But I’m also a realist and know when technology will shift our entire lives. This is one of them.