Plants, maybe. Fungi, hell no.
AI + fungi = you die
Actually I use it as a starting point for fungi. Seek will usually get me to the genus, and from there I can cross reference various books to narrow it down. Hell, sometimes it’ll give me an exact match, and then I just have to perform a yes or no ID with my field guides. That being said, I mostly end up with no, I’m shit scared of all amanitas and most mushrooms just aren’t tasty enough to warrant the effort.
I have heard that spore prints are a reliable way of determining mushroom species (removing the stem, putting the underside of the mushroom on an ink pad, pressing against paper, and comparing the print with those of known species).
I bet an AI could analyze that data pretty well. But since there’s really no market for such a product, if I want it, I would have to make it myself. In which case I highly advise against using it because I really don’t trust me.
There is no ink involved, the spores make the print.
https://doubleblindmag.com/mushrooms/how-to-grow-mushrooms/how-to-make-a-spore-print/
Do not use ai for plant identification if it actually matters what the plant is.
Just so ppl see this:
DO NOT EVER USE AI FOR PLANT IDENTIFICATION IN CASES WHERE THERE ARE CONSEQUENCES TO FAILURE.
For walking along and seeing what something is, that’s fine. No big deal if it tells you something’s a turkey oak when it’s actually a pin oak.
If you’re gonna eat it or think it might be toxic or poisonous to you, if you want to find out what your pet or livestock ate, if you in any way could suffer consequences from misidentification: do not rely on ai.
I don’t actually know if it’s considered a deepfake when it’s just a voice; but I’ve been using the hell out of Speechify, which basically deepfakes voices and pairs them with a text input.
…so… nursing school, we have an absolute fuck-ton of reading assignments. Staring at a page of text makes my brain melt, but thankfully nowadays everything’s digital, so I can copy entire chapters at a time, and paste them into Speechify. Now suddenly I have Snoop-dogg giving me a lecture on how to manage a patient as they’re coming out of general anesthesia. Gets me through the reading fucking fast, and it retains so, SO much better than just trying to cram a bunch of flavorless text.
Speechify also pays the people who’s voices they’re using rather than taking them from publicly available videos and recordings without permission.
That’s also the business model behind ad localization now, they’ll pay the actor once for appearing on set and then pay them royalties to keep AI editing the commercial to feature different products in different countries.
If they’re up front about it and if the actor agrees to it (as with Speechify), I don’t see a problem with that. SAG should also be involved to try and determine fair compensation.
AI is what we make it. That being said, there has not been a proper filtering of input for AIs learning pool. Shotgun approach may be easiest and fastest but is not bestest
The creation, curation, and maintenence of training data is a big industry in and of itself that has been around for years. Likewise, feature engineering is an entire sub-discipline of data science and engineering unto itself. I think you might be making the mistake that chatgpt = AI.
hmm guess which one also doesn’t suck the energy equivalent of a sizeable town
That’s something of a red herring. The source of that energy matters more than how much is used (use renewables where possible) - your ire is directed at entirely the wrong place; and also how much is used in computers and datacentres doing other stuff? If I’m generating pictures I’m not playing games, which is using the same card and probably more constantly.
I gotta congratulate you though, that’s an argument that to my knowledge was NOT levelled against photography when that was invented. I mean like all the other arguments it’s bollocks but at least it’s new! <pretty much every other argument against ai art was levelled at photography and many of therm at pre-mixed paints before that!>
by no means this is a new argument and it is not aimed at individual use cases so “If I dont ai I game” doesn’t really apply and is severely shortsighted
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2024/mar/07/ai-climate-change-energy-disinformation-report
https://www.forbes.com/sites/arielcohen/2024/05/23/ai-is-pushing-the-world-towards-an-energy-crisis/
Perhaps do a bit of research to update your latest knowledge before writing cocky answers
Again, we need to shift towards renewables. AI is not the problem you’re angry with here, stop railing against new technology and new artistic media and start railing against oil companies
And by new I meant “not over a hundred years old”, not “over three months old”
Hey, deep fakes are awesome. They are a necessary step in the evolution of the technology that leads to holodecks.
I want holodecks, I bet you want holodecks, practically everyone wants holodecks, so we have to go through this stage of the tech to get there.
Call me a luddite, but I don’t think going through a phase where bad actors have the power to set every democracy back by centuries through misinformation and other bad actors have an infinite kiddy porn machine is worth it for what ultimately amounts to a luxury VR Video game that, if even possible to exist (the holodeck isn’t a “technology”, it is a narrative device), would be something that realistically only the ultra-rich would be able to use (because let’s face it, Star Trek’s post-capitalist utopia isn’t happening)
Okay, you’re a luddite
