Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I Am An AI Hater

anthonymoser.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 515 posts

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#131

Post by petralithic »

doctorpangloss wrote: post #104
petralithic wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've talked to people like this and when you dig deep enough, it's a fear of the economic effects of it, not actually any strongly held belief of AI inherently not being intelligent or emotional. Similarly, and I'm speaking generally here, ask artists about coding AI and they won't care, and ask programmers about media generation AI and they also won't care. That's because AI outside their domain does not (ostensibly…

> I've talked to people like this and when you dig deep enough, it's a fear of the economic effects of it You hear what you want to hear. You think fine artists - and really, how many working fine artists do you really know? - don't have sincere, visceral feelings about stuff, that have nothing to do with money?

We can talk anecdata all day. I do know fine artists, for example sculptors and painters, as well as many digital creators, as I commission pieces from them for prints in my place, and I've talked to all of them about AI out of curiosity.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#132

Post by sindriava »

dpoloncsak wrote: post #111

> Critics have already written thoroughly about the environmental harms, the reinforcement of bias and generation of racist output, the cognitive harms and AI supported suicides, the problems with consent and copyright... This paragraph really pisses me off and I'm not sure why. > Critics have already written thoroughly about the environmental harms Didn't google just prove there is little to no environmental harm, I…

I appreciate this response. The environmental impact is such a red herring it's not even funny. Somehow these statements never include the impact of watching Netflix shows or doing data processing manually.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#133

Post by didibus »

I love this article, I'm not an AI hater personally, but I doubt an AI could have written it. And in a way, that's as compelling of an argument as the content of the article itself.

Honestly, the first paragraph is packed full with good talking points, there's definitely a lot of ignoring of the cons of AI happening, I try to remember how I felt when social media first appeared, but I recall loving it, being part of all the hype, finding it amazing, using it all the time...

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#134

Post by jacquesm »

perching_aix wrote: post #121
jacquesm wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That a human made it to express their feelings.

What do I care? Can't even tell what feelings are supposedly being expressed there.

That goes for all art. It either stirs you or it doesn't. I find https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tjstsWoQiw to be one of the most beautiful pieces ever recorded, others can't listen to it and think it is bland and a terrible recording.

You can't argue about taste.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#135

Post by hex4def6 »

yifanl wrote: post #69
danielbln wrote: post #12

Yet it is here to stay, won't go away and even if it won't get any better at the useful things it does, it is useful. The externalities are real, some can be removed, some mitigated. If you're a hater and a human, then you don't have to mitigate anything, of course. Me, I hate the externalities, but I love the thing. I want to use my own AI, hyper optimized and efficient and private. It would mitigate a lot. Maybe so…

> Yet it is here to stay, won't go away Source for this claim? Are you still using Groupon?

Of course it's here to stay. There are models that are --right-now-- great at text-to-speech, speech-to-text, categorization, image recognition, etc etc. Even if progress stopped now, these models would be useful in their current state.

Your argument could just as easily be applied to social networks ("are you still using friendster?") or e-commerce ("are you still using pets.com?). GPT3 or Kimi K2 or Mistral is going to become obsolete at some point, but that's because the succeeding models are going to be fundamentally better. That doesn't mean that they weren't themselves fit for a certain task.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#136

Post by perching_aix »

jacquesm wrote: post #134
perching_aix wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do I care? Can't even tell what feelings are supposedly being expressed there.

That goes for all art. It either stirs you or it doesn't. I find https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tjstsWoQiw to be one of the most beautiful pieces ever recorded, others can't listen to it and think it is bland and a terrible recording. You can't argue about taste.

But then why wouldn't AI generated art be able to stir me? Why is a human being in the loop so important as to be supposedly essential?

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#137

Post by exoverito »

randcraw wrote: post #23
jkingsman wrote: post #8

I appreciate seeing this point of view represented. It's not one I personally hold, but it is one a LOT of my friends hold, and I think it's important that it be given a voice, even if -- perhaps especially if -- a lot of people disagree with it. One of my friends sent me a delightful bastardization of the famous IBM quote: A COMPUTER CAN NEVER FEEL SPITEFUL OR [PASSIONATE†]. THEREFORE A COMPUTER MUST NEVER CREATE AR…

Picasso's Guernica was born of hate, his hate of war, of dehumanization for petty political ends. No computer will ever empathize with the senseless inhumanity of war to produce such a work. It must forever parrot.

Needless to say, most humans are unoriginal parrots too, one need only look at the prevalence of memetic desire. Few are capable of artistic genius like Picasso.

One technical definition of empathy is understanding what someone else is feeling. In war you must empathize with your enemy in order to understand their perspective and predict what they will do next. This cognitive empathy is basically theory of mind, which has been demonstrated in GPT4.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-024-01882-z

If we do not assume biological substrate is special, then it's possible that AIs will one day have qualia and be able to fully empathize and experience the feelings of another.

It could be possible that new AI architectures with continuously updating weights, memory modules, evolving value functions, and self-reflection, could one day produce truly original perspectives. It's still unknown if they will truly feel anything, but it's also technically unknowable if anyone else really experiences qualia, as described in the thought experiment of p-zombies.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#138

Post by lostmsu »

hofrogs wrote: post #51
holbrad wrote: post #18

>Critics have already written thoroughly about the environmental harms, the reinforcement of bias and generation of racist output, the cognitive harms and AI supported suicides, the problems with consent and copyright, I just can't take anything the author has to say seriously after the intro.

All of those are links in the original text, do you think that these points aren't true? What makes it unserious?

It would take too much time to tear the entirety of this slop apart, but if you understand the mechanics of AI, you'd know environmental impact is negligible vs the value.

The links are laughable. For environment we get one lady whose underground water well got dirtier (according to her) because Meta built a data center nearby. Which, even if true (which is doubtful), has negligible impact on environment, and maybe a huge annoyance for her personally.

And 2 gives bad estimates such as ChatGPT 4 generation of ~100 tokens for an email (say 1000tok/s from 8xH100, so 0.1s so 0.1Wh) using as much energy as 14 LEDs for an hour (say 3W each, so 45Wh, so almost 3 orders of magnitude off, 9 if you like me count in binary).

P.S. Voted dems and would never vote Trump, but the gp is IMHO spot on.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#139

Post by petralithic »

eaglelamp wrote: post #130
petralithic wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've talked to people like this and when you dig deep enough, it's a fear of the economic effects of it, not actually any strongly held belief of AI inherently not being intelligent or emotional. Similarly, and I'm speaking generally here, ask artists about coding AI and they won't care, and ask programmers about media generation AI and they also won't care. That's because AI outside their domain does not (ostensibly…

If you dig deep enough isn’t the same thing true of people like yourself? Do you truly believe that the large language models we currently have, not some fantasy AI of the distant future, are emotional and intellectual beings? Or, are you more interested in the short term economic gains of using them? Does this invalidate your beliefs? I don’t think so, most everyday beliefs are related to economic conditions. How co…

When did I say I believe AI to be intelligent or emotional? Of course I use it for economic factors, but I'm honest about it, not wrapping it up in some intellectual, solipsizing arguments. I'm not even sure what non-economic arguments you're talking about, my point is that at the end of the day most people care about the economic impact it might have on them, not anything about the technology itself.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#140

Post by tensor »

traes wrote: post #113
tensor wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very few of them, if any, are true. Firstly, the author doesn't even define the term AI. Do they just mean generative AI (likely), or all machine learning? Secondly, you can pick any of those and they would only be true of particular implementations of generative AI, or machine learning, it's not true of technology as a whole. For instance, small edge models don't use a lot of energy. Models that are not trained on r…

Come on now. You know he's not talking about small machine learning models or protein folding programs. When people talk about AI in this day and age they are talking about generative AI. All of the articles he links when bringing up common criticisms are about generative AI. I too can hypothetically conceive of generative AI that isn't harmful and wasteful and dangerous, but that's not what we have. It's disingenuou…

Deep image models are used in medical applications. LLMs have huge potential in literature searches and reference tracing.

Small models are still generative AI. The author nor you can even define what you are talking about. So yes, I can dismiss it.

Post reply on HN