Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
I get what you are saying. But does it not sound like the horse farmers when the car came out? It sucks, I don't blame artists for fighting it and for hating it, but isn't it inevitable that it will happen to most jobs at some point? I work in cyber security, and it would suck a lot once AI gets good enough to start taking me out of business, but I also accept that it is inevitable and the solution of fighting against technological advances has rarely worked historically.
Look where we're heading as regard to pollution (to which all our engines are not a little factor) and ask yourself: would have we known what we know today, was this 'inevitable' path we decided to follow (ultimately it was a choice, nothing more: the choice of using much cheap(er) energy and workforce as a way to gain more power/money faster) was it really the smartest one? Or should we have tried to follow another less obvious path but maybe less destructive? Destructive, like AI is in regard to the OP question but it obviously is not limited to AI.
That's one of the most glaring lie (not yours, I mean it in a general way) in regard to tech: criticizing it or one of its form is not being 'against tech'. It's a critic of tech and/or a refusal of a certain type of tech. The choice is not between ''using tech' and 'being a caveman'. It's about questioning the way we use tech (to do what? Do we really need machines to do creative work?), how we control it (who decide what it's allowed to do and how it is trained), and who owns it (who get all the money? Not the artists they were trained upon, obviously). And who controls all of that?
Also, keep in mind that exactly like AI or the smartphone are considered 'high tech' today, the horse and the cart were also considered high-tech back in their days. Do you think their users were hostile to tech? I don't think so ;)
Interesting thought about the lie, I guess sometimes it's hard to determine what is a criticism against a use case of a tech and what is criticism against the tech itself.