AI is stealing writers’ words and jobs…

[borringman]

so is existence

Oh no, I'm real. Not so sure about you though.

 

[trappedslider]

Oh no, I'm real. Not so sure about you though.

 

[Art Waring]

I 100% agree with you on all this. But I'm going to push back a bit on this particular bit.

So...where do you think the water goes when it's evaporated by use for Gen "AI"?

The difference between human use is that the water is not all lost after use.

Here is an article covering water usage & Gen-AI.

Google’s scope-1 onsite water consumption in 2022 increased by 20% compared to 2021, and Microsoft saw a 34% increase over the same period. Most big tech water consumption for server cooling comes from potable sources. Here, the consumed water is actually evaporated and “lost” into the atmosphere.

It is simply evaporated & lost into the atmosphere, never to return to its source. Period. Hope that answers your question.

 

[Art Waring]

Well considering this conversation is mostly "Generative AI/AI is bad... mmkay" only with different words it's not much of a conversation.

Well, respectfully, have you been paying attention?

I originally covered the LAION-5B database and discussed the ramifications of using a non-profit dataset for profit by corporations almost two years ago at this point. I am probably the first person on the forums to discuss LLM's and the nature of their design, and how that very nature encourages data theft.

No response, or a response to diminish the importance of the subject... (often followed by "ai is inevitable so shut up already," to indirect dehumanizing insults like labeling artists as "Luddites").

I then covered the ethical and moral concerns, such as exploiting labor in the global south in order to run ai programs across the globe (which is not only exploiting human labor, but also causing significant mental damage to workers who are forced to sift through the most vile content on the web), which was either completely disregarded or considered not enough of a direct problem (just look back into the thread why don't ya).

The response I did get was literally getting cyberstalked by a techbro, unable to respond or defend myself. No response from anyone else... In public anyway

I have spent countless hours over the last several years researching the subject in detail. I have probably posted more concrete information about gen-ai on this forum than anyone else, not becuase I wanted to, but because I work with artists whom this directly affected. Their livelihoods were on the line, and I decided to talk about it, at length, over the course of this thread and several others.

I also discussed in-industry terminology in other threads like what "black boxes" are in regards to gen-ai, I also had several informative conversations about the way gen-ai is evaluated (see the posts about Conner Leahy of Juncture-AI). I have also covered the energy consumption and water use among other environmental concerns.

It is now several long years later. I have extensively covered multiple angles of the industry, the technology, and the people running these companies. I have indeed been there, and done that.

If my recent responses to you are shorter than you expect, maybe you should look back on your own posts over those two years and see why I have lost my patience for long detailed posts. I have repeatedly, over several years, tried to explain to you the inner workings of the tech, the industry, and the people, and your responses were always deflections, whataboutism's, and other attempts to take attention away from this potentially destructive technology. You have also repeatedly cherry-picked my posts to serve your ends, while constantly pressing your side of the argument without any consideration for artists/ writers/ actors who are impacted.

At this point, is there really any reason I should respond to your posts with more consideration than you have afforded me in the past? Should I continue spending hours making detailed posts containing in-depth information on the subject, only to get a short glib response from you? If anything, I have adapted to your strategy, and I think that a meme response is valid when you yourself have little to contribute meaningfully to the conversation about generative-ai.

Thank you for your time.

 

[overgeeked]

The difference between human use is that the water is not all lost after use.

Here is an article covering water usage & Gen-AI.

It is simply evaporated & lost into the atmosphere, never to return to its source. Period. Hope that answers your question.

Not really, no. So what happens to the water "lost" to the atmosphere?

 

[Scribe]

Not really, no. So what happens to the water "lost" to the atmosphere?

I'm guessing it follows the winds, and is dumped elsewhere as rain.

 

[overgeeked]

I'm guessing it follows the winds, and is dumped elsewhere as rain.

Right. So it's not "lost." The earth is a closed system. The water goes somewhere else in the system. It doesn't disappear never to be used again. That's the point. It's framing the natural process of evaporation as some kind of weird scare tactic.

"Oh no. Look out. The water's evaporating. It's lost."

No, it's not. It moved down the block or across the state. And water from up the block or the other side of the state will fall as rain in the location that just magically "lost" water due to evaporation.

The closest thing to a problem with water use in cooling towers etc is that sometimes the water is polluted. Not that it evaporates.

The only other problem is companies buying up drinking water and using it for stuff like this. Again, the natural process of water evaporating isn't a problem. Nor is the water in any meaningful way "lost."

 

[Scribe]

Maybe 'repurposed' or 'lost as drinking water' or 'hey how about them there forest fires' burning up half the continent. I dont know, I'm in meeting prep lol.

 

[trappedslider]

Well, respectfully, have you been paying attention?

I originally covered the LAION-5B database and discussed the ramifications of using a non-profit dataset for profit by corporations almost two years ago at this point. I am probably the first person on the forums to discuss LLM's and the nature of their design, and how that very nature encourages data theft.

No response, or a response to diminish the importance of the subject... (often followed by "ai is inevitable so shut up already," to indirect dehumanizing insults like labeling artists as "Luddites").

I then covered the ethical and moral concerns, such as exploiting labor in the global south in order to run ai programs across the globe (which is not only exploiting human labor, but also causing significant mental damage to workers who are forced to sift through the most vile content on the web), which was either completely disregarded or considered not enough of a direct problem (just look back into the thread why don't ya).

The response I did get was literally getting cyberstalked by a techbro, unable to respond or defend myself. No response from anyone else... In public anyway

I have spent countless hours over the last several years researching the subject in detail. I have probably posted more concrete information about gen-ai on this forum than anyone else, not becuase I wanted to, but because I work with artists whom this directly affected. Their livelihoods were on the line, and I decided to talk about it, at length, over the course of this thread and several others.

I also discussed in-industry terminology in other threads like what "black boxes" are in regards to gen-ai, I also had several informative conversations about the way gen-ai is evaluated (see the posts about Conner Leahy of Juncture-AI). I have also covered the energy consumption and water use among other environmental concerns.

It is now several long years later. I have extensively covered multiple angles of the industry, the technology, and the people running these companies. I have indeed been there, and done that.

If my recent responses to you are shorter than you expect, maybe you should look back on your own posts over those two years and see why I have lost my patience for long detailed posts. I have repeatedly, over several years, tried to explain to you the inner workings of the tech, the industry, and the people, and your responses were always deflections, whataboutism's, and other attempts to take attention away from this potentially destructive technology. You have also repeatedly cherry-picked my posts to serve your ends, while constantly pressing your side of the argument without any consideration for artists/ writers/ actors who are impacted.

At this point, is there really any reason I should respond to your posts with more consideration than you have afforded me in the past? Should I continue spending hours making detailed posts containing in-depth information on the subject, only to get a short glib response from you? If anything, I have adapted to your strategy, and I think that a meme response is valid when you yourself have little to contribute meaningfully to the conversation about generative-ai.

Thank you for your time.

I'm not one to type out things when i can copy and paste or even link directly to them. Unless you want me to really copy and paste every counter argument from a researched with citations google doc that is updated often.

I summed the conversation up as "Generative AI is bad mmkay" because that's what this thread is and even the OP acknowledged that. I seem to be the only one pointing out any positives of it. From folks who are making money with their AI art (the nerve) to folk who for whatever reason are unable to devote the time to traditional art creating but are now able to do what would have taken years and or a lot of money before.

Basically the whole thing comes to the following: blame capitalism and the requirement of wage labor even when it is no longer needed instead of AI. AI is just yet another symptom of a naughty word system.

Only two other users have actually taken up my open invitation of sending me a PM with their idea for a better system. One was just short and to the point and the other was very in depth.

 

[Scribe]

Basically the whole thing comes to the following: blame capitalism and the requirement of wage labor even when it is no longer needed instead of AI.

No. This isnt the point in our species (as if the globe is actually a unified species anyway) where we shrug off the shackles of Capitalism and run headlong into the loving arms of AI for freeing us from labour.

Thats not how this is going to go down.