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

291–300 of 515 posts

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#291

Post by TeMPOraL »

tzumaoli wrote: post #248

It's interesting to see the trend of the attitude towards GenAI in Hacker News through out the years. This is totally vibe based and I don't have numbers to back it up, but back in 2022-2023, the site was dominantly people who mostly treat GenAI as a curious technology without too much attachment, and some non-trivial amount of folks who are very skeptical of the tech. More recently I see a lot more people who see th…

I don't pay much attention to the submission themselves, but I do care what the fellow HN-ers think, and my own "vibe-based" perspective is that the voices have been predominantly negative for many years now, and only grow even more so.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#292

Post by petralithic »

tanvach wrote: post #64

I've noticed that the younger you are, the most likely you're in love with AI. So the tide will turn eventually, for better or worse. I talked to someone recently who claims with no irony that 'AI has zero downside'. I don't hate AI. I hate the people who're in love with it. The culture of people who build and worship this technology is toxic.

Isn't that the nature of all technologies? I'm sure people 50 years ago thought the internet wasn't going to be a big deal, like Krugman.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#293

Post by petralithic »

footy wrote: post #100
pmdr wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, I get that the tone might not be liked by everyone, but his work does raise some IMO valid concerns about the economics LLMs, which I don't see discussed around here very often. Then again, I get that AI has AI-friendly owners.

I agree with you, but until very recently it was super rare to see anything other than techno-optimism about LLMs on this site. I assume partially for the reason you bring up.

That's definitely not true, read the initial threads about GitHub Copilot and Stable Diffusion on HN.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#294

Post by bonoboTP »

AlotOfReading wrote: post #155
petralithic wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A human might generate a piece of media using AI (either via a slot machine spin or with more advanced workflows like ComfyUI) and once they deem it looks good enough for their purpose, they might display it to represent what they want it to represent. If Guernica was AI generated but still displayed by Picasso as a statement about war, it would still be art. Tools do not dictate what art is and isn't, it is about th…

This is a debate that existed long before LLMs with things like action painting. If I give you a Jackson Pollock and a piece from someone who randomly splattered paint on a canvas until it looked like Jackson Pollock, are they the same?

Pollock was a part of a coherent intellectual movement across all of art. You can't productively discuss whether it's art without focusing on that. He didn't just wake up one day and think to himself that it would be fun to throw paint on the canvas like this and then people looked and wondered if that's art or not.

It was the intellectual statement conveyed through that medium that made him famous.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#295

Post by justsomejew »

zwnow wrote: post #66
danielbln wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AI is information.

Disinformation with more and more propaganda due to being vulnerable to bad actors. There's already evidence on people spreading propaganda through LLMs.

I think you are a real person, still you sound like a broken record.. "disinformation..", "propaganda".. "bad actors"..

You are the "bad actors", pumpkin. Worse than the other ones.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#296

Post by perching_aix »

DyslexicAtheist wrote: post #276
perching_aix wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To honor the "spirit" of OP's post: I looked up Picasso's Guernica now out of curiosity. I don't understand what's so great about this artwork . Or why it would represent any of the things you mention. It just looks like deranged pencilwork. It also comes across as aggressively pretentious. What makes that any better than some highly derivative AI generated rubbish I connect to about the same amount?

nazis held the same believe.

> nazis held the same believe.

Along with being against any form of animal cruelty.

They were also pretty obsessed with spiritualistic quackery.

Are we giving each other fun facts or what? Surely one does not need to go all the way to the nazis to find a Picasso hater? Or are you just following the footsteps of the blogpost author too?

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#297

Post by TeMPOraL »

sonofhans wrote: post #161
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…

> This paragraph really pisses me off and I'm not sure why. No hate, but consider — when I feel that way, it’s often because one of my ideas or preconceptions has been put into question. I feel like it’s possible that I might be wrong, and I fucking hate that. But if I can get over hating it and figuring out why, I may learn something. Here’s an example: > Didn't google just prove there is little to no environmental…

> The harm argument is simple — AI data centers use energy, and nearly all forms of energy generation have negative side effects. Period. Any hand waving about where the energy comes from or how the harms are mitigated is, again, bullshit — energy can come from anywhere, people can mitigate harms however they like, and none of this requires LLM data centers.

Presented like this, the argument is complete bullshit. Anything we do consumes energy, therefore requires energy to be supplied, production of which has negative side effects, period.

Let's just call it a day on civilization and all (starve to death so that the few survivors can) go back to living in caves or up the trees.

The real questions are, a) how much more energy use are LLMs causing, and b) what value this provides. Just taking this directly, without going into the weeds of meta-level topics like the benefits of investment in compute and energy infrastructure, and how this is critical to solving climate problems - just taking this directly, already this becomes a nothing-burger, because LLMs are by far some of the least questionable ways to use energy humanity has.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#298

Post by jacquesm »

ls-a wrote: post #198
nahuel0x wrote: post #128

This was a merchant who sold pills that had been invented to quench thirst. You need only swallow one pill a week, and you would feel no need for anything to drink. "Why are you selling those?" asked the little prince. "Because they save a tremendous amount of time," said the merchant. "Computations have been made by experts. With these pills, you save fifty-three minutes in every week." "And what do I do with those…

[flagged]

The door is there ----->

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#299

Post by _DeadFred_ »

ACCount37 wrote: post #228
mrsilencedogood wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"This is the best argument on the page imo, and even that is highly debated. I agree with "AI is performing copyright infringement" and see constant "AI ignores my robots.txt". I also grew up being told that ANYTHING on the internet was for the public, and copyright never stopped me from saving images or pirating movies." I think the main problem for me is that these companies benefit from copyright - by beating anyo…

Lawyers of all the most beloved companies - Disney, New York Times, book publishers, music publishers and more - are now engaged in court battles, trying to sue all kinds of AI companies for "copyright infringement". So far, case law is shaping up towards "nope, AI training is fair use". As it well should.

If your product wouldn't exist without inputting someone else's product, it is derivative of that someone else's product. This isn't a human learning. This is a corporate, for profit product, it is derivative, and violates copyright.

Re: I Am An AI Hater

#300

Post by petralithic »

_DeadFred_ wrote: post #281
petralithic wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Haven't these arguments been the same since Stable Diffusion came out? Someone (A) will say what you said, then someone else (B) will say, well humans remix as well, A: no that's different because we're humans not machines, B: there is no need to prefer a biological substrate over a silicon one; A: AI will produce the same result over and over, B: not if you change the temperature and randomize the seed. It's tiresom…

There is no intention in either case. Just a machine doing machine things.

The intention is the human prompting or creating the work flow, the computer was never going to autonomous create images, why would it?
Post reply on HN