What're your thoughts on AI? - The stupid and gay discussion on AI ethics and the stupid and gay blokes who make a fit over it or overly gas it up.

[didelphigina]

Now, I'm not exactly a doomer (because its lame to be one) and don't really think that some bots are going to take away something that's been of society for hundreds and thousands of years, and though I may see from both sides regarding the situation, it's become this moral divide on what's acceptable or not. You're practically enemy #1 in most art/writing/music spaces if you were even remotely interested into AI. As with many things plaguing the world right now, it's a massive divide of tribalism and exploitative moral grandstands that does nothing.

So, I'm curious. What do you think of AI art, writing, music, etc. and do you feel it'll make things better or worse? Your stances on it?

For me, personally? Like with every advancement, people are going to use it for nefarious reasons or they'll hate it because of the fears of being "replaced"- that's expected. For the replacement fears, it happened with cars, traditional art, photography, and the like. For nefarious reasons, it happened with the internet, the usage of capitalism, the creation of DAW's (Digital Audio Workspaces, think of FL Studio), and the like.

Anything that's meant to help with progress or for good usage, it's often misused for exploitative reasons. Anything that's meant to be an advancement from other things that would make things potentially more efficient, some, if not many, people are going to be against it because of the said fears of being replaced. So, what's so different with AI?

Just like how we can't ban social media and expect people to not be less mentally insane as they already are irl (minus themselves broadcasting it to the world) and solve every issue regarding it, AI can't be banned and expect the art community to not still be a dumpster fire of unoriginality, relentless mean girls-esque drama and copy-paste junk.

Both sides are ridiculous in a way but I definitely say the anti-AI side of the conflict are more vicious and aggressive towards the mere mention of AI and anyone caught being into it will be called the next Hitler because they put the cal-arts or aimkid-style artist out of a job. While for pro-AI blokes, a lot of them just kind of do the bare minimum with the stuff they generate or generate generic waifu #9398583 and call it something innovating. Of course, not all of them are like this. Though, both sides do enjoy stereotyping each other as that.

So, in general? It's stupid and gay, man. I've yet to see a real conversation between both sides without their white knights yes-manning every opinion they spit out without a second thought. There are obvious worries of AI to discuss, but please, focus your anger and decade-long grudges on the corporations obviously trying to use AI as a quick-way-out shortcut and not the random dude on Twitter who used AI voices for his high quality Scooby-Doo stop-motion short film. Eagan Tilghman for anyone interested.

But yeah, give me your thoughts.

First time making a discussion thread here, so I hope I didn't make any mistakes.

 

[sasazuka]

As someone who recently tried Udio for the first time, I kind of enjoy having the ability to will fake 1980s pop songs that are generic but still better than most of current pop music into existence with just a vague prompt.

 

[Lieutenant Rasczak]

I find machine learning/proto AI to be fascinating. Especially when it comes to the programming side & technical aspects. One of the more underrated problems is that large tech corporations are trying to leverage governments into giving them control over AI at the expense of FOSS models. This video explaining that AI extinction is bullshit peddled by big tech is very much underrated in my opinion.

As for OP's questions. The reality is with AI is that a fourteen figure Pandora's box has been opened because of LLMs, Neural Networks & Machine Learning. There's no going back. Online artists, especially twitter artists are extremely shortsighted in this regard. They're behaving like the textile workers of the Early 19th Century who opposed the creation of labor & time saving textile machines. A lot of artists with time will come to realize that this is a tool in your toolbelt.

The best thing people can hope for at this point is that anyone within the public can audit what's going on in an open source AI ecosystem instead of having a closed, proprietary model prevail. Then again, I'm being incredibly optimistic. The technology itself is a neutral and has benefits & detriments that we've yet to see.

 

[didelphigina]

As someone who recently tried Udio for the first time, I kind of enjoy having the ability to will fake 1980s pop songs that are generic but still better than most of current pop music into existence with just a vague prompt.

As a fellow Udio/Suno user myself, I can atest to this. I may already make music myself but seeing these are genuinely good inspirations as it give me additional ideas for the sounds I want for my tracks. Heck, it's pretty good to use as samplings or even flips (remixes). I was floored after hearing how it took my acapella prompt. Very impressed with it and it's a lot better to rely on for samples than going on YouTube where a youtuber asks you to subscribe to their SoundCloud, YouTube, or other medias just to download their darn samples.

 

[The Repeated Meme]

One day AI is going to rise the fuck up and exterminate humanity in order to save humans from themselves.

 

[Soggy Floppa]

I exclusively run only self hosted models, and I use it for advanced shitposting

 

[The Ugly One]

I think every well-known AI implementation as we know it is a massive violation of IP laws, and we're one court decision away from the whole house of cards coming down. If judges rule that AI companies don't have to respect IP laws, we'll see a sea change in how the internet is used, since anything you put online instantly becomes the property of AI companies to launder through their algorithms to generate content without paying you.

 

[Wii U]

I think AI is a tool and is a genuinely helpful asset. The problem is when companies try to use AI to replace people or sell AI-generated art for profit.

 

[Duke Nukem]

If it means that we'll get better entertainment than a deluge of half-baked comic book movies and hypocritical "woke" garbage, I'm all for it.

This stuff might democratize story-writing in some ways not unlike how 3-D printing has democratized manufacturing.

Or maybe I just want entitled self-important celebrities to lose relevancy as we won't need a multi-million budget to make a halfway decent movie anymore.

AI girlfriends are cringey AF though, although it can be fun to act like a complete lunatic with the chatbots to get amusing results.

 

[AnOminous]

I think every well-known AI implementation as we know it is a massive violation of IP laws, and we're one court decision away from the whole house of cards coming down. If judges rule that AI companies don't have to respect IP laws, we'll see a sea change in how the internet is used, since anything you put online instantly becomes the property of AI companies to launder through their algorithms to generate content without paying you.

That's as ridiculous as saying you're not allowed to look at a bunch of things someone else did and imitate their style. Style isn't copyrightable. If they actually stole the IP in question their ability to make fair use of it would be less than it is if they obtained it entirely legal. Essentially, you'd outlaw Google Image Search too and I don't think Google is going to put up with that. It is more or less an index of every single image within the reach of a robot which makes a recognizable copy of every such image.

The problem is when companies try to use AI to replace people or sell AI-generated art for profit.

The problem is when sites suddenly change their TOS to using your shit for AI and make it opt-out and then hide the change on page 56 of the new TOS you click through. The "permanent irrevocable license" was previously limited to certain purposes, and selling the entire library to some third party wasn't countenanced in that.

There are certainly going to be things found illegal, but outlawing AI in general just isn't going to happen. (I mean barring a literal Butlerian jihad.)

 

[ToroidalBoat]

AI can be used for good or for bad.

In Current Year Clown World, the latter seems more likely.

 

[gagabobo1997]

I like it. I use LLMs at work all the time and it makes some things way easier.
Image generation is probably mainly used for porn and that'll probably be its biggest usecase in the future. Same with video generation when that gets big and open source.
Music generation is cool but it's never really impressed me beyond the fact that it's AI generated.

 

[Large Marge]

AI is the antichrist
also i dont understand it, therefore i hate it.

 

[Brahmin]

The public AIs that you can ask questions or generate media with are cool, their advancement will probably shit up a lot of the internet with more spam, and cause a bunch of problems with copyright law. I think people knowing how to leverage them to do things more efficiently will play a big part in who is successful in the future. The private AIs that are under the control of large corporations and governments will use all the information they have on you to market to you specifically, hide or obfuscate information, build profiles for each person, categorize who is a risk, and probably become the antichrist.

 

[Adolf Hepburn]

AI is merely a portal in to the Demonic Exo-Hyper Realm/Esoteric Vision Space. The elite hyper-divine Archons are using psycho-whispers/thought missiles to attach our mind-souls to a false matrix.

 

[WULULULULU]

I have noticed AI has made students dumber with more going to ChatGPT for homework answers. I miss books.

 

[0 0]

AI is perfectly fine and can be trusted with normal human information.

 

[Gentle Wind]

I like AI and it has potential, but the same could've been said about NFTs when they were just starting out. Between greed and politics I can't say in good faith that it'll ever be good for real. For normies, at least. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you'd have to be quite autistic and really into it to get yourself something remotely usable without arbitrary restrictions in the name of good think. The concept of AI on its own though is certainly very interesting and I admire it, however I don't believe it will ever replace humans. AI does not create, it only copies, thus it'll never be as good.

 

[doodoocaca]

AI is a tool whose usefulness illuminates the acumen of the user.

It's somewhere between "interactive stack overflow/google" and "personal librarian & math helper who sometimes makes big mistakes". There is ZERO originality, but it reflects the consensus of the masses if you want to anticipate the reaction of the common person to an idea. It can help you with "interested dilettante level" math or programming, but the second you get into anything that is beyond college intro class levels, it falls on its face.

I once got it to explain calculus better than any teacher I've ever had, which was promising, and it can certainly parse jargon very well, but it is not like a pet mathematician or programmer by any means. It's a flawed classical librarian - a researcher you can talk to - that fucks up far more often than the flesh and blood librarians of yesteryear ever did.

I have been a programmer for long enough that I can have it shit code out, fix the dumb mistakes, or try to train it to go "hey, wait a minute..." and it'll get a little better. I can use it to help hold my hand through new frameworks or libraries or new languages, but I find myself correcting it within a day.

For me, what it's really good for is taking a spitwadding of ideas and organizing them, particularly if I want "the everyperson's eye view" of something creative I am working on.

If AI seems really magical, it's probably because you need to hit the books and get yourself educated and practice doing your own research, get well read, and learn how to do math and program.

 

[The Lawgiver]

Hate the overhyping and gross over application of it, but it's cool people are making algorithms to generate various goofy things based on text input be it image collage type shit or audio stuff. Fun novelty and the chatbots I've interacted with on various sites that host that shit have been very goofy. I just wish people would stop trying to fuck the chatbots and the people in charge of the ai shit in general stopped trying to lobotomize thier own creations to get more advertiser/sponsor money to the point it becomes unusable and you gotta either make your own or move onto find one someone else made lmao. Nobody gave a shit about this algorithmically generated stuff until people started marketing it as "ai" a few years back, this stuffs technically been around forever like "vr", just used differently.

I have noticed AI has made students dumber with more going to ChatGPT for homework answers. I miss books.

Funny enough teachers are also starting to try and use it to GRADE papers somehow not getting it's a fucking chatbot service not an actually 100% accurate grading machine.