i have noticed that there are two competing narratives in the leftwingosphere:
A) ai is 100% slop garbage and a giant waste of electricity, pumping out garbage images with multiple hands and the text is nothing but hallucinations that can’t even count the number of r’s in “strawberry”
and at the same time
B) AI is going to take all our jobs and we will all be homeless and poor while tech billionaire CEOs turn us into slaves
Can’t say I’ve seen B anywhere. All I’ve seen is “tech billionaire CEOs want LLMs to take all our jobs and turn us into slaves,” not so much belief that they can. Perhaps you’re misinterpreting?
Yeah, I agree that in the long term those two sentiments are inconsistent, but in the short term we have to deal with allegedly misguided layoffs, and worse user experiences, which I think makes both fair to criticise. Maybe firing everyone and using slop AI will make your company go bankrupt in a few years, and that’s great; in the meantime, employees everywhere can rightfully complain about the slop and the jobs.
But yeah, I don’t think it’s fair to complain about how “inefficient” an early technology is and also call it “magic beans”.
Those are only conflicting statements if you believe that the market will not embrace worse products. It totally will so long as you have a group of people who lack the critical analysis skills to compare the products and arrive at the conclusion that the new one is worse.
It doesn’t help that the potential drivers of this action are massive conglomerates, so if a sweeping change comes from the top-down and is paired with a lot of propaganda (Marketing) then people will have no choice but to accept it as the standard.
I think that a lot of criticism about the actual quality of AI art is mixed, though. I feel like it has flaws, but I’ve seen arguments about flaws I don’t think are actually real problems with the technical quality.
Option A feels like wishful thinking or sour grapes or something to me. Community crossover with the humanities and fine arts is significant.
B is feeling a bit less imminent too; it just wasn’t clear a couple years ago that it will take more than raw compute. That being said, AGI is still bound to happen eventually, seeing as NGI did.
You can absolutely leave and fund a “good” company, good luck getting anywhere.
If the product has value then people will buy it*
Humans have always created jobs, we love em, can’t get enough of em, in a capitalist system if people want to buy human made goods and services and those systems are profitable then there will be jobs for those people
This isn’t a communist dictatorship where you will be forced to buy government sponsored AI produce and no other choice is given to you
*I assume the products would have little logos on them like “non-gmo, organic, human made and farmed fruits!” etc
@CanadaPlus
If we step aside from cartoon logic for a second, we can still see manmade crucial tasks and a vast background of sloppy low quality production.
Not that quality is highly sought after these days anyway.
No, it’d be cartoon logic if I said their motorcade should watch out for packs of dynamite and walls painted to look like more road. By contrast, broken stuff not working isn’t a hard case to make.
i have noticed that there are two competing narratives in the leftwingosphere:
A) ai is 100% slop garbage and a giant waste of electricity, pumping out garbage images with multiple hands and the text is nothing but hallucinations that can’t even count the number of r’s in “strawberry”
and at the same time
B) AI is going to take all our jobs and we will all be homeless and poor while tech billionaire CEOs turn us into slaves
Can’t say I’ve seen B anywhere. All I’ve seen is “tech billionaire CEOs want LLMs to take all our jobs and turn us into slaves,” not so much belief that they can. Perhaps you’re misinterpreting?
Yeah, I agree that in the long term those two sentiments are inconsistent, but in the short term we have to deal with allegedly misguided layoffs, and worse user experiences, which I think makes both fair to criticise. Maybe firing everyone and using slop AI will make your company go bankrupt in a few years, and that’s great; in the meantime, employees everywhere can rightfully complain about the slop and the jobs.
But yeah, I don’t think it’s fair to complain about how “inefficient” an early technology is and also call it “magic beans”.
Those are only conflicting statements if you believe that the market will not embrace worse products. It totally will so long as you have a group of people who lack the critical analysis skills to compare the products and arrive at the conclusion that the new one is worse.
It doesn’t help that the potential drivers of this action are massive conglomerates, so if a sweeping change comes from the top-down and is paired with a lot of propaganda (Marketing) then people will have no choice but to accept it as the standard.
I think that a lot of criticism about the actual quality of AI art is mixed, though. I feel like it has flaws, but I’ve seen arguments about flaws I don’t think are actually real problems with the technical quality.
Option A feels like wishful thinking or sour grapes or something to me. Community crossover with the humanities and fine arts is significant.
B is feeling a bit less imminent too; it just wasn’t clear a couple years ago that it will take more than raw compute. That being said, AGI is still bound to happen eventually, seeing as NGI did.
@Eyekaytee @teawrecks
Fun fact: they are scarily compatible as long as the CEOs are not in their role thanks to meritocracy :)
That can’t be possible, if they fire all their workers and produce AI slop then we will simply start a new company with human workers that doesn’t.
This isn’t communism we can simply start a new business at any time for any reason, with or without AI
@Eyekaytee
You seem to think, once again, that meritocracy is a thing.
It’s the exact same dynamic you are used to when it comes to yes-men and bootlickers.
Are they more productive? No. Do they get better paying job? Yes.
You can absolutely leave and fund a “good” company, good luck getting anywhere.
If the product has value then people will buy it*
Humans have always created jobs, we love em, can’t get enough of em, in a capitalist system if people want to buy human made goods and services and those systems are profitable then there will be jobs for those people
This isn’t a communist dictatorship where you will be forced to buy government sponsored AI produce and no other choice is given to you
*I assume the products would have little logos on them like “non-gmo, organic, human made and farmed fruits!” etc
Wouldn’t slop AI crash their motorcade or private jet pretty much immediately?
@CanadaPlus
If we step aside from cartoon logic for a second, we can still see manmade crucial tasks and a vast background of sloppy low quality production.
Not that quality is highly sought after these days anyway.
No, it’d be cartoon logic if I said their motorcade should watch out for packs of dynamite and walls painted to look like more road. By contrast, broken stuff not working isn’t a hard case to make.