Being anti-AI is part of being anti-fascist.
-
My point is that "AI" is a sloppy term that is like saying "TV is bad".
Some TV -- most, even -- is bad. Some of it is literally lifesaving.
The "AI" that helps with breast cancer (and other) diagnoses is *NOT* the same thing (or even the same *type* of thing) as a chatbot. Running a locally hosted background remover is not the same thing as a datacenter.
Techbros and marketing hype blur that distinction, to hide how they're being awful about how it's being USED.
@StevenSaus the locally hosted models come from the same mechanism (stolen labor) and conception (white supremacist worship of the written word) as the commercial datacenter models. so, no, we're not blurring any distinction here. the technology does not get less fascist when you run it at home.
-
My point is that "AI" is a sloppy term that is like saying "TV is bad".
Some TV -- most, even -- is bad. Some of it is literally lifesaving.
The "AI" that helps with breast cancer (and other) diagnoses is *NOT* the same thing (or even the same *type* of thing) as a chatbot. Running a locally hosted background remover is not the same thing as a datacenter.
Techbros and marketing hype blur that distinction, to hide how they're being awful about how it's being USED.
So it is *absolutely* possible to say "datacenters are bad" and "the investor class is stealing our resources for this pipe dream", or that genAI and the chatbots and their frontier models and using it for military applications, etc. are bad.
-
Being anti-AI is part of being anti-fascist. Odd that some people still don't get that.
@joeress I think that’s not entirely true. Because we’re going to need machine guns to beat the machine guns they’ll shoot at us.
Of course don’t make the mistake of trying to use the master’s tools to break the master’s house. But clone and domesticate them to hell.
I don’t intend to bring a spoon to knife fight.
-
@StevenSaus the locally hosted models come from the same mechanism (stolen labor) and conception (white supremacist worship of the written word) as the commercial datacenter models. so, no, we're not blurring any distinction here. the technology does not get less fascist when you run it at home.
Okay, that's your perspective. Cool. You seem to have a couple of fundamental assumptions I don't think I agree with in principle or in tone, and that's okay.
Like I told the other guy, I was offering why I didn't agree with the sentence as structured, since it seemed like he was surprised at that response. Not to argue or convince anyone else.
-
So it is *absolutely* possible to say "datacenters are bad" and "the investor class is stealing our resources for this pipe dream", or that genAI and the chatbots and their frontier models and using it for military applications, etc. are bad.
@StevenSaus what you're communicating to us with this line of reasoning is that you're fine with the acceleration of fascist technology if it results in cancer cures, so i'm out
-
@StevenSaus the locally hosted models come from the same mechanism (stolen labor) and conception (white supremacist worship of the written word) as the commercial datacenter models. so, no, we're not blurring any distinction here. the technology does not get less fascist when you run it at home.
The analog here would be how frustrated you (and I!) get when people say socialism or communism or collective action is bad because of the USSR or China or Pol Pot.
-
Okay, that's your perspective. Cool. You seem to have a couple of fundamental assumptions I don't think I agree with in principle or in tone, and that's okay.
Like I told the other guy, I was offering why I didn't agree with the sentence as structured, since it seemed like he was surprised at that response. Not to argue or convince anyone else.
tone
maybe you should reconsider trying to tone-police people on this kinda thing. again, this is a facet of white supremacy culture, specifically right to comfort.
http://whitesupremacyculture.info for further details, though we suspect you'll disregard the suggestion
-
tone
maybe you should reconsider trying to tone-police people on this kinda thing. again, this is a facet of white supremacy culture, specifically right to comfort.
http://whitesupremacyculture.info for further details, though we suspect you'll disregard the suggestion
If you're hearing tone policing, that is unintended. I was answering what I perceived as someone asking for information honestly, and declared openly that was my sole intent.
Likewise, I'm not tone policing you, I'm saying that I am acknowledging and accepting that you see things differently than I do and that I am okay with that.
Nothing more or less. Please do not hear what I didn't say.
-
If you're hearing tone policing, that is unintended. I was answering what I perceived as someone asking for information honestly, and declared openly that was my sole intent.
Likewise, I'm not tone policing you, I'm saying that I am acknowledging and accepting that you see things differently than I do and that I am okay with that.
Nothing more or less. Please do not hear what I didn't say.
You seem to have a couple of fundamental assumptions I don't think I agree with in principle or in tone
this is literally tone policing, and saying "i'm sorry that you heard that but i didn't mean it" is not an apology. do better.
-
tone
maybe you should reconsider trying to tone-police people on this kinda thing. again, this is a facet of white supremacy culture, specifically right to comfort.
http://whitesupremacyculture.info for further details, though we suspect you'll disregard the suggestion
And thank you for the recommendation, by the way. I do appreciate the challenge to my beliefs, even if I don't always immediately agree. It's the only way I am aware of to remove my own upbringing in this patriarchal racist culture.
Tone: genuine; I'm reading now.
-
You seem to have a couple of fundamental assumptions I don't think I agree with in principle or in tone
this is literally tone policing, and saying "i'm sorry that you heard that but i didn't mean it" is not an apology. do better.
"If" -> this isn't realtime, I'm having to assume your reaction; this is just a conditional if/then/else.
"You seem to" -> I am not going to tell you what you're thinking, only how it came across to me, as information.
I am sorry that I came across as tone policing.
It was not intended. That does not change the first sentence. It does signal that it was not malicious.
I will own the effect, absolutely. I'm not going to say that it was intentional when it was not.
-
P pelle@veganism.social shared this topic
