• Jerkface (any/all)@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    The personal risk isn’t in talking to AI, it’s in listening to AI. And our environment is already becoming crowded with it. There is an argument that AI is disproportionately expensive and exploits externalities, but it’s hard to take that argument seriously from meat eating motorists.

    • BigDanishGuy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      meat eating motorists.

      Hey hey now, calm down, there’s no need to get personal here :-) We both dislike AI, can’t we just agree to hate AI and leave it at that? Like Legolas and Gimli in LotR? I’ll even let you toss me…

      My main concern about AI is that it’s rotting our cognitive abilities, yours seem to be founded in an environmental stance. I can respect that, and I think it’s a valid argument.

      The personal risk isn’t in talking to AI, it’s in listening to AI.

      I think both are bad, but can we agree to “AI bad. Don’t use AI”?

      • Jerkface (any/all)@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        Actually, no, I’m pro AI. I’m anti-capitalist. Much like how I’m pro housing and anti slums, pro food security and anti gouging. I strongly agree that AI is being used to manipulate and control us, and I believe it is the most effective tool to that end that any generation has ever faced.

        My complaints are actually NOT rooted in environmentalism, I just acknowledge the point.

        AI is going to be food and water for the human race and needs to be accessible and democratized. AI exclusively in the hands of private corporations is as bad as water in their hands.

        We have common opponents, even if we disagree philosophically.