Chatgpt told me no once and I've been traumatized ever since. I know my place, now.
Right. In this instance, with hindsight (noticed it's a meme community), I wouldn't say anything. I've seen similar cases where the intent was to push someone down, though. I wasn't sure, and sided with caution.
I didn't mean to act uptight, or attack the commenter (I tried a mild tone), my bad.
The vast majority of people don't think in legal terms, and it's always possible for something to be both legal and immoral. See: slavery, the actions of the third reich, killing or bankrupting people by denying them health insurance... and so on.
There are teenagers, even children, who posted works which have been absorbed into AI training without their awareness or consent. Are literal children to blame for not understanding laws that companies would later abuse when they just wanted to share and participate in a community?
And AI companies aren't using merely licensed material, they're using everything they can get their hands on. If they're pirating you bet your ass they'll use your nudes if they find them, public domain or not. Revenge porn posted by an ex? Straight into the data.
So your argument is:
- It's legal
But:
- What's legal isn't necessarily right
- You're blaming children before companies
- AI makers actually use illegal methods, too
It's closer to victim blaming than you think.
The law isn't a reliable compass for what is or isn't right. When the law is wrong, it should be changed. IP law is infamously broken in how it advantages and gets (ab)used by companies. For a few popular examples: see how youtube mediates between companies and creators, nintendo suing everyone they can (costs victims more than it does nintendo), everything disney did to IP legislation.
I like the tech and I want it implemented in an ethical way by someone who cares. I got into technology because I love it, I want to see humanity reach ever greater feats of knowledge and have the benefits accessible to as many people as possible. I think LLMs and image generation have enormous potential and it'd be a shame to not it see so much of it fulfilled in my lifetime.
That said, god, I hate the absolutely insane arguments used by AI fans. Look at this comment section. It's just the worst, most nonsensical comparisons, over and over again. Use the fill tool in paint but don't like it when someone compares a fill algorithm with massive art theft by corporations enriching billionaires? Hypocrite. Use anything you've ever seen as reference but don't think software and human beings are comparable? Hypocrite. Take pictures with a camera? Believe it or not, hypocrite.
Can't we agree that Sam Altman and his friends don't have our best interests in mind? That what has been done to artists, authors, journalists, and all sorts of creators, is immoral and shouldn't be ignored? Shit, they're the only reason the tech is even possible! We would not enjoy such powerful image generation if not for the decades of material they've provided humanity and AI companies have taken without permission.
Why are you so cruel to those who made it all possible? To frame the shoulders you stand upon, those of creators whose work was stolen and whose livelihoods are at risk, as of Luddites and elitists, then claim their protests should be ignored, is beyond disrespectful.
Angry and scared people often lash out, and nobody likes being on the receiving end of that, I get it. I would also like it if we could talk this out calmly... But they're the ones being kicked down. I think a bit of anger is to be expected, it's understandable. What it isn't, is an excuse to keep trampling over humanity's creative workers because someone was mean to you.
It's not perfect, sure, but we as a society should be capable of deciding that some things aren't okay without giving the state carte blanche to censor as they see fit. If the system can be abused, then we ought to fix it, not forgo it entirely.
Plus, governments and companies already suppress or ban a bunch of speech, often in favor of the ruling class. I doubt outlawing harmful speech like parent comment suggests would be the straw that breaks democracy's back.
Of all the aesthetics one could go for, I'm not sure that I'd pick Twitter-AI themed IED, myself.
Nooo... I haven't finished it yet, I thought I'd be able to do so on Linux :'^(
We're only talking about the original at least, right?
You can also rent on YouTube, and even buy there, so you can always access your cherished movies in reliable and enduring Google Services.
The wonders of ActivityPub allow Mastodon users to interact with Lemmy, actually. Wild stuff.
What you're describing sounds closer to how atproto is supposed to work, but it's yet unproven in regards to decentralization.
I spend most of my time thinking, not writing code. I really don't care all that much about time saving, but I do concede that not taking my fingers off the home row feels really great. Other editors, even this very text input I'm writing my comment in right now, feel clunky in comparison.
The most important part to me, however, is how customizable it is. I'm not just using (neo)vim, I'm making and using my own personal development environment. Almost every aspect, be it visual, keybinding, system integration or behavior, is changed as I go to suit my needs above all else. I think the only way to go even further with this would be switching to Emacs :^) lisp machines are no joke.
It's not necessarily mechanically faster—though it absolutely can be: sometimes I get my editor state to where I wanted so naturally and so quickly that I actually pause for a moment after to ponder, wait, how the hell did I do that?—but darn do I like spending time in it, and it just keeps getting better. In a way, that actually makes me more productive: I'm a happier dev.
In the end, it's all about you. If you are at your best in vscode or sublime or whatever, keep at it. My only suggestion is: if you're willing to put in the time and effort, consider trying to make whatever you use truly yours.