I hate this timeline
Thats 99% lemmy users
We let environmentalism become an individual issue, and that was a mistake. Can we not do this for AI? It’s a society-wide problem, not something you can solve by measuring your own personal AI footprint.
So normal decent human beings
how to belittle and minimize a very serious thing: call any protesters of it a " ___ vegan"
They are “journalism vegans”. They are choosing to abstain from actual journalism for clickbaiting, herd mentality, and personal lack of skill reasons.
Why are you dissing on vegans? Veganism is legit, bro.
I want to avoid it but with google making sure that search results get worse and worse I’m in a bit of a pickle. Other search engines still feel lile they’re a bit behind though
Duck duck go
Unfortunately, it’s not better and also shows slop
I’ve been using DuckDuckGo for over a decade, the results are fine, and !bangs are extremely useful for piping queries directly to specific sites, !w for wikipedia, !aw for archwiki, etc. The Duck.ai function is a recent addition, and it can be easily disabled if you don’t want it. By default it doesn’t usually pop up by itself. You can also use lite.duckduckgo.com for a much leaner search and absolutely no AI.
Just switched to noai.duckduckgo.com. Thanks stranger!
You can at least turn off its built-in summaries. But some filtering to detect AI generated articles would be nice.
You can also get a search extension in firefox (probably others as well but I haven’t looked)
It essentially strips the bullshit out and just shows you search results.
If you’re willing to pay money then Kagi is a great alternative. They claim they don’t collect or share your data. Though, Kagi isn’t very good for local search results and probably never will be.
You’ve probably heard this before but do consider alternatives like Startpage and Qwant. It’s not flawless but I’ve found it’s definitely better.
I refuse to use it because it’s shit.
We are not the same.
Every last bit of it? What is your stance on use of AI for tasks such as data analysis of massive sets for scientific research, or procedural automation of massive operations?
Yes, I am also frequently accosted by Google’s data analysis of massive sets for scientific research. I can’t tell you how many times they’ve forcefully inserted research analysis of large data sets into my search results.
AI doesn’t exist, machine learning algorithms can be useful and are used with no controversy, generative bullshit is basically useless.
You’re using a lot of very loosely defined terms with a lot of certainty. Machine learning is AI, we just usually apply it to the more simple versions of it. Where do you personally draw the line? I fully understand the plethora of risks, downsides, and injustices that can potentially be involved in the matter, but I legitimately don’t understand the extremist level hatred that some people express to anything that could hold the title of AI. To me, it parallels with someone saying that they hate ionizing radiation. Frequently, it’s also bad, and your entirely reasonable to try and avoid it on a daily basis, but it also has many uses that are beneficial and life-saving.
Yup, these things are still garbage for >90% of all applications people are jamming them into. Breathed a sigh of relief when my company CEO said he doesn’t see us using AI for more than can center routing for at least the next several years.
I just don’t have a use for it. I already am generative AI.
you aren’t artificial tho lol
[citation needed]
Effectively I believe we are. During my MFA I realized we were simply copying as a form of craft. It’s all we do in arts. Any great work feels like just one continuous story retold again and again.
This is deeply cynical.
i wonder if they came up with such term to mock those who dont want to use ai and possibly actual vegans on the side.
They use to mock us with “Luddite” but the Technologists looked into that actual movement (rather than the caricature) and agreed, “yeah sure, like them”. That took the sting out of the pejorative, so they picked another mocked group to connect it with.
This is the dumbest shit I’ve ever read. Refusing to submit to corpo ratfuckery isn’t a lifestyle choice. It’s common sense.
Abstaining from a thing does not make one a vegan. That’s not how any of this works.
It’s like how they put the word gate after something to say that it is a scandal involving the former word.
Somesort of political scandal involving road maintenance? Oh yes well that’s roadgate then. Even though the Watergate scandal was in fact it scandal in the watergate hotel, rather than a scandal about water.
I’m sex vegan. Cry about it virgins
No animals harmed during sex…hmm
Disagreed. I am an animal.
I’m a sex vegetarian gotta be a bit open
I’m a sex pescatarian. I will not be answering questions.
Sex flexitarian is where it’s at
No mayo in the bedroom? Why even bother.
Vegan aioli just doesn’t cut it
“Vegan sex” is actually a different thing. It’s penetration but you stop before you cum.
If the human you’re fucking consented, then consuming their fluids is vegan. Hell if they consent, eating them would be vegan too.
Animals do not consent to having fluids extracted or their lives taken and flesh consumed. Animal agriculture keeps animals in filthy, torturous conditions too, which no animal would ever consent to either.
I had a fish that died by suicide. We didn’t eat it, but arguably
It was kept in captivity by you though, which is not it’s natural habitat so any choices it made were, arguably, under duress.
If you lived by a creek and regularly recognised a fish swimming by, and one day this fish killed itself in front of you- you still shouldn’t eat it as fish contain a lot of parasites and there’s very likely also something toxic in the water causing the fish to harm itself this way.
But yeah, sure, hypothetically: if for a year or so you knew a wild fish that lived in an unpolluted and ecologically healthy body of water, and one day this fish chose to kill itself in front of you. You could, if you really wanted to eat a suicidal fish, eat the fish and say it was vegan because the only harm that came to the fish was through the un-coerced choices of said suicidal fish.
Awe so the article author has a vendetta against vegans got it.
I mean, abstaining from animal products makes someone a vegan, right? If you abstain from AI products then it would follow that you’re an “AI vegan”.
Abstaining from animal products is just vegetarian. Veganism requires an extremely strict adherence to a very specific set of rules concerning animals.
Vegetarians can eat cheese, which is an animal product.
It follows, but it is also feels like click bait.
A definition of vegan is:
A vegetarian who eats plant products only, especially one who uses no products derived from animals, as fur or leather.
There is an environmental parallel, and it made me read the article to see what they were on about – so I guess it worked.
To be clear, I am very pro environment (I live in it); I just feel like this is crossing the streams of related, but completely different movements, isn’t particularly helpful.
I am a AI Freedom Fighter.
I’m one too!
Reading this thread, I wonder if the term is intended to divide a largely environmentalist opposition.
Makes “nocoiner” seem tame by comparison.
There’s a huge push right now to salvage the AI hype bubble as people realize the tech can’t live up to the promises. They are also trying to prevent regulation.
This includes the pushes to humanize the tool, like saying it deserves rights or that there may be some kind of racism against the tool.
They’re trying to pretend it’s real AI rather than extremely complicated text prediction. Hell, the less knowledgeable among them might even believe it. LLMs are a sort of language pareidolia.
Yo
I don’t use A.I. because I’ve had nothing but negative interactions with A.I. Customer service bots that fail to give adequate responses, unhelpful and incorrect search result summaries, and, “art,” that looks like shit hasn’t made me want to sign up for ChatGPT or Gemini. For most people, this isn’t a moral stance, it’s just that the product isn’t worth paying for. Stop framing people that don’t use A.I. as luddites with an ax to grind just because tech bros spent billions on a product that isn’t good yet.
It’s fair to say that the environmental and ethical concerns are significant and I wouldn’t look down in anyone refusing to use AI for those reasons. I don’t look down on vegetarians or vegans either - I don’t have to agree with someone’s moral stance or choices to respect them.
But you’re right, LLMs are full of crap.
For most people, this isn’t a moral stance, it’s just that the product isn’t worth paying for.
Wait till you see the price of a burger in another five years.
You only notice AI-generated content when it’s bad/obvious, but you’d never notice the AI-generated content that’s so good it’s indistinguishable from something generated by a human.
I don’t know what percentage of the “good” content we see is AI-generated, but it’s probably more than 0 and will probably go up over time.
Shit take, the more AI-made media is online, the harder it is for AI developing companies to improve on previous models.
It won’t be indistinguishable from media made with human effort, unless you enjoy wasting your time on cheap uninteresting manmade slop then you won’t be fooled by cheap uninteresting and untrue AI-made slop.
deleted by creator
