In a post-scarcity solarpunk future, I could imagine some reasonable uses, but that’s not the world we’re living in yet.

AI art has already poisoned the creative environment. I commissioned an artist for my latest solarpunk novel, and they used AI without telling me. I had to scrap that illustration. Then the next person I tried to hire claimed they could do the work without AI but in fact they could not.

All that is to say, fuck generative AI and fuck capitalism!

  • AIhasUse@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    63
    arrow-down
    37
    ·
    6 months ago

    It also makes a way for the poor to be able to afford to get art to make comics and other things when they otherwise would have been unable to hire artists. Generative ai also allows poor people to write code they couldn’t before because they couldn’t afford the help. It also gives poor people the ability to brainstorm new ideas when they can’t afford a team of consultants.

    It helps the poor, just like search engines and the internet. There were people back in those days scared of change as well. Gen ai is a huge equalizer or wealth and power. The vast majority of people using Gen Ai are using it for things that they never would have considered being able to hire someone to do anyway.

    • ASeriesOfPoorChoices@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      6 months ago

      shh. if you can’t afford to pay people, then you should just die. /s

      you’re quite right, and it’s a shame that generative AI art is treated like a gun and not a hammer. Both can be used to kill someone. (it’s not a great analogy, but hopefully people see my point about it generative AI being more than a weapon to kill artists)

    • paw@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      6 months ago

      First of all it concentrates power and wealth on the owners of the models (Microsoft, OpenAI) or the ones that provide the tools (Nvidia).

      Yes, there is truth in it, that people who couldn’t afford to pay someone to create art, or get consulting, can get this now to a certain extend (if they can afford internet access and pay the AI services they need). But this comes also at the price of lowering the income of the people who provided these services. They now need to compete in the business creation market and not in the market that they trained for. Not everyone can create and maintain a business with or without starting money, just from a skill point of view. Nor does everybody want to.

      • Deceptichum@quokk.au
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Umm what?

        When I run a checkpoint at home, how do you think the creator of checkpoint is profiting or gaining any power/wealth?

        This stuff is ridiculously easily self hosted and run independently of any company.

        • Plastic_Ramses@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          6 months ago

          It might be “ridiculously easy” but there is a reason why linux adoption is around 3ish%.

          Its because it isnt the easiest option.

        • errer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Can’t really run the models in reasonable amounts of time without a reasonable GPU, there’s still a bit of a cost barrier

      • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        6 months ago

        The concentration of power part is not true unless people keep trying to use copyrights and the legal system to protect themselves from genai, at which point it will be true. Currently there’s plenty of self hosted solutions like stable diffusion and services like the ai horde to help even people without gpu for free

        • paw@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          6 months ago

          You are still reliant on the models trained by these companies. This training is very expensive. And yes there are ioen source models exist (thank god) but there are also closed source models that are very successfully advertised.

          And self hosting requires money and skill. This means there is a lot of people who lack both and may then use closed source models.

          • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            6 months ago

            And self hosting requires money and skill. This means there is a lot of people who lack both and may then use closed source models.

            This is what we’ve mostly to solved with the AI Horde, where we allow people to rely on self-hosted open models.

            • paw@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              This is good news indeed.

              But I see the same problems as with email, chat etc. You can selfhost almost everything. But too few people are doing it. You can use Linux as your Desktop and at least 4% are doing it. Still too few if you ask me.

              And if most of the people keep using the commercial and closed source options over the self hosted one, then I see this concentration of power. Additionally, there is the risk of regulatory capture, where big companies may try to at least hinder self hosting due to (what I consider) made up risks.

              However, its good that there are currently such good open source option. I hope they will grow and become the defacto standard.

              • BeyondWakanda@mastodon.green
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                @paw @db0
                Exactly, this is just a diversionist argument pretending that just because a theoretical possibility exists the problem can be considered solved in practice - it’s like the decrepti old capitalist argument that “everyone can start their own company” if they don’t like how they’re treated as an employee. No they can’t, not in the real world out there. That only works on paper, i.e. if you ignore the current distribution of resources and privileges in the existing society and economy.

                • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  This is not theoretical. It already is in place and is already serving people. The only reason it’s not growing more is because we don’t have any marketing and we don’t participate in the capitalist rot economy.

              • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                But I see the same problems as with email, chat etc. You can selfhost almost everything. But too few people are doing it. You can use Linux as your Desktop and at least 4% are doing it. Still too few if you ask me.

                The system is explicitly setup so that normal people don’t need to set up anything. Experts and enthusiasts are the one doing the complex work, while normies just use a simply client like this and power users can also use more advanced clients.

                And if most of the people keep using the commercial and closed source options over the self hosted one, then I see this concentration of power.

                That’s up to all of us to counter by promoting the good solutions instead, not of just despairing and begging politicians to fix this (they won’t, they’ll promote monopolies instead)

                • paw@feddit.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  That’s up to all of us to counter by promoting the good solutions instead, not of just despairing and begging politicians to fix this (they won’t, they’ll promote monopolies instead)

                  That was always the case. Having said that, I’ll appreciate your enthusiasm and that you share this work.

        • Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          6 months ago

          So your gonna solder your own video cards?

          In theory sure, but in practice it’s just gonna give more control to MS and NVidia since they are the ones most people would use.

      • AIhasUse@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        6 months ago

        The people who get screwed are the ones who cling to the idea that AI is the enemy and refuse to learn to use it. The jobs will be taken by the flexible and adaptive people who use this new incredible tool. This isn’t a new idea, this is how it’s been as long as people have had any jobs and found any more efficient way to do them. The issue is that some people are more willing to continue to grow and adapt than others. The ones who are not willing to, maybe because they are old, or just have oversized egos, will be left behind while they shout angrily into the wind that progress is evil.

    • Veraxus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      This is why I focus on distribution rather than training. If you commercialize a model trained on things you don’t own/license, and it generates anything remotely infringing, you should be fully on the hook for every single incident.

      But if a model is trained and distributed freely as FOSS, then it’s up to anyone running it to ensure the output is not infringing. This protects fair use while also ensuring that big companies tread more carefully when redistributing models that can violate fair use by competing with those whose work was trained on without permission and are subsequently being emulated without permission.

      • JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        6 months ago

        Who do you care so much about protecting the failed and unethical law of copyright? Are you going to tell me you don’t pirate media too?

        • BeyondWakanda@mastodon.green
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          @JackGreenEarth @Veraxus
          Failed and unethical as long as it’s used by non-human entities like “companies” to enrich bosses who didn’t create the content themselves. Just and ethical when it’s used to protect actual named human authors, and only them. Big difference. Big big difference.

        • Veraxus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          6 months ago

          Why do you care so much about defending unimaginably wealthy corporations stealing the labor of regular people?

          See, now we have both misrepresented each others comments.

          • Deceptichum@quokk.au
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            We don’t.

            We also want to see capitalism gone as well as its copyright laws.

            Likewise you weren’t misrepresented, you argued in favour of copyright.

            • Veraxus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              6 months ago

              In that case, I didn’t misinterpret you, either. You argued in favor of labor theft.

    • jaybone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      6 months ago

      And it helps the poor perform heart surgery because they couldn’t afford medical school. And it helps the poor build space craft because they couldn’t afford engineering degrees.

      There’s a reason some of these things are done by experienced professionals not some AI kludge. If you really want to fix the problem, allow the poor access to education so they can become professionals in these areas if they so wish. The answer isn’t some AI telling them to put glue on their pizza.

      • ___@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        I need a cover for my novel. Hold on real quick while I get this 4 year degree and spend $80k to send an fu to the AI overlords and design it myself.

        After that I’ll throw my shovels away and use spoons instead.

        • Incblob@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          6 months ago

          Or you could pay someone… There’s a bunch of starting artists who work for cheap. There, saved you $79.5k Sadly your novel won’t sell because it’s been buried by an avalanche of ai generated books. (amazon recently limited the number of books you can self publish to only five per day… Your argument works both ways, why should I study and practice for years to learn to write my own novel (or pay you) when Ai can just generate it for me?

          • ___@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            6 months ago

            I recently commissioned a logo because AI is terrible at it. Once that becomes good enough, I don’t see myself paying another $100 when I can generate it for nearly free. I had submissions for the logo that were clearly AI generated. It’s the same problem with search, you won’t know what’s human unless you dig. It harms artists, but technology improvement always leaves a trail of industries obsoleted. The technology is here, it makes some work more efficient. If you cripple it now to save jobs, you’ll limit the investment and any future gains due to fear of repeat. I think the key is to look at it as a tool, not a replacement. It can certainly help you flush out your ideas and write a better book.

            • Incblob@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              Gains for who? If Ai does all the art and books and all the artists are broke, the only ones left are the corporations making money, and the ones selling AI/hardware. The rest are left with generic art, and ironically, innovation in art will stall because Ai cannot innovate.

              And it’s not being used as a tool, you yourself said that you’ll use it instead of paying an artist. As I said, there’s already a ton of Ai books being churned out, flooding the market. Are you fine with yourself being replaced by Ai because it’s cheaper?

              • ___@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                6 months ago

                I think at the point AI can “replace” artists, the individual becomes the artist. A much less exclusionary field if you don’t have the drawing ability. It becomes just another advanced paint brush.

                The true creatives will still find a way to stick out. The definition of “art” will change.

              • LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                6 months ago

                the only ones left are the corporations making money,

                So at worst by your logic there is no difference. I have no preference for artist capitalists over chipmaking capitalists.

                • Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  What means of production do you think artists hold?? It’s absolutely deranged to put artists (who 99 times out of 100 are not wealthy) and CEOs in the same class.

        • ArmokGoB@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          You would die (or be out on the street and wish you were dead) if your primary source of income relied on having access to filler art for some purpose and you didn’t have thousands of dollars to hire an artist.

            • ArmokGoB@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              Say you’re producing an independent film, or a game, or some other work that is multimedia, working on a shoestring budget, and with a limited set of skills.

      • atrielienz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        Barter. Between artists. That kind of collaboration happens all the time and people are deliberately ignoring it so they can justify AI LLM’s.

      • AIhasUse@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        6 months ago

        Yeah, I can guess that you think that everyone who wants to make comics should either have to draw it themself or hire someone to draw it. Just like how you probably would have thought that anyone who wants a shirt should weave it themself or hire a hand weaver.

        People will always create new and better machines to automate away what they don’t want to do. Similarly, there will always be people who are upset about this. It’s an age-old story. You can accept the times or try to prevent an avalanche with your body, but that snow doesn’t care at all about your favorite little patch of land. It’s doing its thing regardless.

        • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          6 months ago

          Environmentally speaking, people should probably learn to sew and not be overly reliant on unsustainable mechanisation.

          • AIhasUse@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            6 months ago

            Yeah, and they should probably not use cars, or plastics, or make spaceships, or airplanes, or smart phones, or beanie babies. They shouldn’t farm or hunt more than they need. They shouldn’t make medicines either. They should do none of these things if preserving the environment is the number one concern. The issue is that there are billions of years of evolution driving us to explore and conquer, to learn and manipulate our surroundings, to do anything we can to stay alive and keep our lived ones alive. That couple billion years absolutely annihilates any vague notion of preserving the environment. I’m not saying it’s a better idea, just that people are restless by design us all curling up into little balls and having minimal impact on the environment simply isn’t going to happen unless something massively limits us.

            • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              If only there was some kind of compromise between “drawing comics and sewing clothes” and “burn down the entire amazon rainforest to generate apes”

    • Mango@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      6 months ago

      Don’t call it gen AI when you mean generative. It also implies artificial general intelligence which we do not have.