In the words of Miyazaki:
Whoever creates this stuff has no idea what pain is whatsoever. I am utterly disgusted. If you really want to make creepy stuff, you can go ahead and do it. I would never wish to incorporate this technology into my work at all. I strongly feel that this is an insult to life itself.
It’s mathematically an insult to life itself. It changes evolution in human societies to reduce dissent and diversity of thought. And evolution is important in the sense that to stay on one place you have to run very fast.
So it’s sort of a tool for regress. Honestly - similar to the Web itself. It was intended as a hypertext system for scientists. For social interaction there were e-mail and e-news.
I’m thinking - I thought always that Sun is a very cool company, but at the same time they are also the ones who’ve popularized this messy understanding of the future in which, with some commercial adjustments by today’s big tech, we still live. And that understanding was highly centralist, sort of a digital empire.
outliers badly served by advanced averaging machine
Who knew
AI is the new crypto by the ceos and c-suites, sorry but theres no market for it for a regular customer base, and they admitted its costing them alot more money using AI than actually saving or even profitting from it. its actually no wonder the people who fall for AI /crypto are mostly conservatives.
who fall for AI /crypto are mostly conservatives
Let’s separate these two things.
The latter does work well enough to be used by a kind of people. That it’s not the new revolution is fine. I’ve recently looked through NOSTR NIPs and they make a huge thing out of functionality for sending “zaps”, and you know why? Because payments mean possibility to send universal value for some subjective value. It’s a difference in efficiency between barter and money almost.
I can’t be proud of it, because, despite sharing libertarian ideas, I was highly skeptical of such systems. One can say I was gaslighted into considering it all having become a scam.
So - NOSTR looks like something that will work. Its standards involve a lot of different functionality, so clients usually decide to implement only part of it - some like Reddit\Lemmy communities, some like Telegram group chats, and so on (it kinda seems to even out with time, Amethyst has recently got group chats, for example). And thus it often seems devoid of life for new people. But it’s already big enough for the search results to not seem particularly right-wing skewed.
So - I’ve noticed that people very often send these “zaps”. It’s normal to tip stuff in NOSTR. Already.
It’s a long-term advantage, but that system in its architecture is far better than Fediverse, that’s what I mean.
And honestly it’s not unheard of for left-wing technical projects to use good tooling and competent people and appear impressive, but long-term lose to right-wing technical projects which use some tooling and some people and don’t appear too cool, but are more applicable socially.
I really feel like trying to write a NOSTR client, LOL.
Actual computer scientists should also be included with those groups.
Disabled, vehemently anti-AI enby here. The only thing I’m good at professionally is being a great big brain, so taking knowledge work away from me makes me angry.
Roughly 50% of transgender and/or non-binary people are software developers and roughly 50% are furry artists, so it makes sense we would be more wary of AI.
I use arch, btw.
Trans nonby software dev who dated a furry artist, my disdain for AI knows no limits.
I use Nobara, btw. (Is Arch good I’ve never looked into it)
It can be a tiny bit involved to install but if you know your way around Linux already it’s perfectly doable. The arch wiki is a great reference for MANY things and it has a dedicated page with installation instructions.
I like that it’s lightweight because it comes with the bare minimum for a working Linux install and everything on top of that must be explicitly installed by you. I also love pacman (the package manager). It’s never borked anything for me and I’ve yet to be dropped into a dependency hell in 6+ years of using it.
I got in a dependency loop one time. It was my own damn fault 😂
Never anger the cook, the janitor, or the handyman or some such.
But also never anger the gay bi sexual half kitsune half dragon werewolf that controls your access to the internet.
DO provide them with warm rocks to bask on and loads of weed and warm blankets. Bonus points if you can provide these things with out having to have direct communication and tire their social battery out.
Sysadmin is an adequate pastiche, you don’t need to specify the exact queer animal person they are.
Because some are artisans and see that their work is being pillaged for AI “training”.
These findings are consistent with a growing body of research showing how AI systems often misclassify, perpetuate discrimination toward or otherwise harmtrans and disabled people. In particular, identities that defy categorization clash with AI systems that are inherently designed to reduce complexity into rigid categories. In doing so, AI systems simplify identities and can replicate and reinforce bias and discrimination – and people notice.
Makes sense.
These systems exist to sand off the rough edges of real life artifacts and interactions, and these are people who’ve spent their whole lives being treated like an imperfection that just needs to be smoothed out.
Why would you not be wary?
God, the number of people here who don’t know what “more likely” means is insane. Just because you aren’t trans, enby or disabled doesn’t mean the study is bullshit because you hate AI. It means that if you walk up to a random person and ask them about AI, they’re more likely to hate it if they exist in one of those groups.
Secondly, studies like this have value because they can clue people into issues that a community is having. If everyone is neutral about a thing, except for disabled people (who hate it), then maybe that means that the thing is having a disproportionately negative impact on disabled people. Studies like this are not unlike saying “hey, there’s smoke over there, there might be a fire.”
The thing is, EVERYONE hates AI except for a very small number of executives and the few tech people who are falling for the bullshit the same way so many fell for crypto.
It’s like saying a survey indicates that trans people are more likely to hate American ISP’s. Everyone hates them and trans people are underrepresented in the population of ISP shareholders and executives. It doesn’t say anything about the trans community. It doesn’t provide any actionable or useful information.
It’s stating something uninteresting but applying a coat of rainbow paint to try to get clicks and engagement.
The average person is not informed enough to even be aware of the problems with AI. Look at how aggressively AI is being marketed, and realize that this marketing works.
You might be living in an echo chamber. Most Americans use AI at least sometimes and plenty use it regularly according to studies.
We could argue all day over who is experiencing reality or who is in an echo chamber.
Pew Research found that US adults who are not “AI Experts” are more likely to view AI as negative and harmful.
On a tangent, to me as an outsider it seems that most Americans are more likely to view anything as negative. I have no scientific backing for my shitpost though.
We could argue all day over who is experiencing reality or who is in an echo chamber.
We could, or you could read the article where it addresses exactly that point. Most demographics are slightly positive on AI, with some neutral and only nonbinary people as slightly negative. The representative US sample is at 4.5/7.
https://fedia.io/m/technology@lemmy.world/t/2531490/-/comment/11832636
You might be living in an echo chamber. Most Americans use AI at least sometimes and plenty use it regularly according to studies.
You literally are right here accusing me of being in an echo chamber for thinking Americans view AI negatively, then when I back that up with a source you are now… Claiming that the article says that.
Except that the whole “most demographics are positive on AI” piece that you toss in counters your own countering of my disagreement. You’re talking in circles here.
It’s also worth noting this article is using a sample size of 700 and doesn’t go all that heavily into the methodology. The author describes themself as a “social computing scholar” and states that they purposefully oversampled these minority groups.
The conclusion is nothing but wasted time and clicks. You’re in this thread telling people to “read the article” and I’m in here to warn people that it’s not worth their time to do so.
And this is part of a trend I’ve noticed on Lemmy lately: people posting obviously bad articles, users commenting that the articles are bad, and usually about 3-4 other users in the comments arguing and trying to drive more engagement to the article. More clicks, more ad revenue.
No, it’s interesting.
Only corporate executives benefit from AI.
Everyone else is harmed, both directly and indirectly, and it makes the customer experience far worse because workers are replaced by chatbots that are incapable of understanding.
From what I’ve seen, the only people that have a positive view of AI are those who see themselves as the master of others. The trans, nonbinary, & disabled people in this study are very unlikely to fit that mold.
Sorry cis male here I find AI negatively. This article is bullshit trying to separate us. We should all be appalled by AI.
The survey concludes that transgender, non-binary and disabled people tend to view AI more negatively than others. Nothing about this statistical result implies that there aren’t plenty of people in other groups, like you, who view AI negatively. It makes a claim about statistical trends.
If you read a report on statistical trends and repond “That’s bullshit! It doesn’t describe me!” it suggests you’re missing the point of surveys and statistics. The survey is quite compatible with many non-disabled cis men disliking AI a lot.
“more likely”
Oppressed people don’t like the walled garden information tools made and profited from by the people using them as a scapegoat distraction for their fleecing of society?
I’m none of those however I believe they are right to view it negatively. The rest of us should be just a wary.
Smart bunch it would seem.
Fuck AI
“Some groups like bullshit less than others” says survey. “This is why bullshit is bad.” says author. “Here’s my post-hoc reasoning for why I got these results.”
That’s fair, because AI is biased against them.
