677
Protestation (discuss.tchncs.de)
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] agent_nycto@lemmy.world 19 points 6 days ago

Completely untrue.

The environmental impact would still be as bad, it would still spout out misinformation, it would still scrape for art against people's will, the images would still be shit and not art anyway, and would still make an intellectual sinkhole.

[-] seeigel@feddit.org 3 points 6 days ago

If society isn't built around competition and exploitation, the usage of AI can be limited to renewable energy. Whereas now, every gram of hydrocarbon and uranium will be burned to win the race for global domination.

[-] agent_nycto@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago

Great you ignored my other issues with that, but also you don't think people would collectively be using those resources? Also the water used for those ai servers isn't great.

[-] seeigel@feddit.org 3 points 5 days ago

I agree with your other points.

It depends on the type of society if people use all those resources. With AI they will use them much, much faster.

Water doesn't have to be a problem in places where there is enough water.

[-] agent_nycto@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago
[-] seeigel@feddit.org 1 points 3 days ago

Can you tell me the time of the relevant argument, please.

Otherwise I would think that global warming leads to warmer oceans which should cause more evaporation and rain.

[-] agent_nycto@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

Ok, let me explain it simply then.

You remember the water cycle from elementary school? You just described it. Well, there isn't an infinite amount of water on earth. So when you take water out of the water cycle and lock it away, like in jugs of water or in cooling systems for massive computers, it doesn't get evaporated and return to the environment. It stays in its jug.

So the more people store water away, the less water we have to use elsewhere.

As for the timeline, this is already happening now.

They go into more detail in the video. It's long but it is funny.

[-] seeigel@feddit.org 1 points 3 days ago

Sorry but that humor is not my style. I would be glad if you could tell me the relevant moments.

Locking all water away, how is that possible? Have you seen the size of the Pacific?

[-] agent_nycto@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

I'd suggest watching the video if you want more details, but the amount of freshwater we can use is much smaller than the oceans.

[-] seeigel@feddit.org 1 points 3 days ago

Of course, but with more rain there must be more freshwater.

[-] agent_nycto@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

If there's 20% less water in the ecosystem that means 20% less freshwater. This can also cascade because if a pond or something loses too much it might not recover. So taking a lot of water out of the ecosystem is really bad for us.

[-] WarlordSdocy@lemm.ee 5 points 6 days ago

I mean building out renewable energy still has a negative impact on the environment, whether it be silicon for solar panels or concrete for hydro electric dams. Not to mention all the water that gets used to cool the massive data centers or the materials needed to create the computer components used in the data center. So sure you could lessen the environmental impact by shifting to renewables but it would definitely still be there. Reducing usage will always be the best way to help the environment, there's a reason it comes first in Reduce, Reuse, Recycle.

[-] drmoose@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Hate this dumbass meme. All of the worlds datacenters only use like 3% of our energy. You can do more by skipping one shopping weekend than entire lifetime of AI use.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] ImmersiveMatthew@sh.itjust.works 17 points 6 days ago

It is not just Capitalism…is is centralization in all its forms. Too much power in the hands of the few always leads to poor outcomes for the many. This is bigger than Capitalism.

[-] IAmJacksRage@lemm.ee 5 points 6 days ago

What market structure is a good model for decentralization? Socialism generally involves a central authority deciding on resource allocation, and most other approaches also have an emphasis on centralization.

[-] frezik@midwest.social 5 points 6 days ago

There is nothing in socialism that requires central planning. There are specific branches that do, but market socialism would, if anything, use it less than the current system.

I think you have to pick the low hanging fruit and go from there. For instance, we are here and already have made a small, but measurable dent to Reddit traffic. Imagine if everyone came over here, Reddit would no longer be viable as a profit company. Google would collapse if we all supported Peer Tube. Of course these are not going to change the world, but I am convinced if/when decentralization gets traction, we will find ways to implement it everywhere it makes sense. It is about balance as there are benefits to centralization and I am not suggesting everyone is decentralized, but right now the scales are out of balance and we have some tools to start to rebalance. We just have to want it. Well maybe need it which seems to be coming.

[-] ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works 9 points 6 days ago

I remember sitting in an art class where the teacher proclaimed using premixed black paint was improper: a true artist must mix their own black paint. I thought a lot about that when I first started using Photoshop and viewing digital art. I think about it now with AI.

Right now AI is a tool of MBAs who see it as a way to extract money from budgets by cutting costs on artists and writers. AI's only proper use is as a tool by artists and writers.

I disagreed with that teacher then, and still kinda do, but I understand them completely: they were focused on fostering the artistic drive of the creator and eschewing shortcuts. I just think the artistic drive includes so called shortcuts as there is no predefined or 'true' path to being an artist.

[-] Doctor_Satan@lemm.ee 3 points 6 days ago

There are some really good quotes from famous painters in the late 19th and early 20th centuries saying that photography is devoid of all artistic merit, and that it should never and will never be taken seriously as an art form. Every time a new tool comes along, the art community freaks out. It happened with the invention of the camera, it happened with the invention of digital art software, and we are currently watching it happen with AI. Eventually, it'll just be another tool in an artists toolbox.

[-] Ilixtze@lemm.ee 2 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

To avoid panting with black is a common truism for traditional painters that will save your saturation in the lower values of your painting. When painting a naturalistic scene in a traditional medium, you are in a loosing war against the cost of saturation. (saturated pigments tend to be more expensive.) Ivory black and lamp black are very cheap pigments, hence the mixture of black paints tends to have more pigment vs medium. Also, Pigments lose saturation over time. so vibrant paintings you made 10 years ago can start to become grey.

The area of your painting where the saturation loss will become more daunting is the shadows. They tend to be a cool temperature and have a lower value and saturation. This is one of the reasons why it's dangerous , especially for a student to use black; And this is the reason why a lot of traditional painters plot their shadows with washes of earth pigments: Burnt sienna, burn umber etc.

The other reason is convenience: Leaving you some space at the bottom and top of the value structure for final touches. Once you reach the floor value of pure black it's hard to go back up, especially if the rest of the values are down with that black. Same for white. If the key of your painting is too high, it's hard to add any detail without just burning the rest of your picture. So keeping some floor and headspace for the final details can save you a lot of headaches! And this is especially true for black paints since they tend to have so much pigment in their mixtures

In digital media it can also be beneficial to avoid blacks, or at least clip-mask them into a black with a little temperature in them at a early stage of coloring. I can't really explain the reason for this exactly, but neutrals and especially black and white have a lot of visual pull in a monitor that displays thousands or millions of colors. Just adding a hint of temperature to your blacks and whites can make them gentler on the eye and keep the colors from becoming muddy*.

(*Muddy colors are a result from disorganized value and temperature structure between your lights and shadows.)

So your teacher was right, he was just either too lazy of busy to explain all that shit!

Edit: I remember my very cruel first semester painting teacher gave us an assignment of making value swatches for 15 hue-degrees of the color wheel. We had to make 10 swatches of low saturation greys (grey mixed with a hint of color pigment) From the lightest we could manage to the blackest. He would make us repeat the whole set if one swatch was "too saturated" or if a value scale was off. IT WAS HELL. I am not sure if that exercise was intended to make us despise black and white tubes or give us an idea of how different the proportion of pigment and value is between painting tubes. I developed an irrational fear of adding black to lower values.

[-] VitoRobles@lemmy.today 2 points 6 days ago

My art teacher in middle school would rant for hours about how awful Photoshop was for the industry, as "Photoshop effects" in movies are so noticeable. She was part of the group who wanted to ban CGI and Pixar because it wasn't real art.

[-] seeigel@feddit.org 9 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Companies are the original AI. They turn humans into a machine that does whatever the owner wants. Kind of like the dreaming humans in the Matrix movie.

[-] Comtief@lemm.ee 6 points 6 days ago

sure lets just get rid of capitalism as a whole, lets see where that lands us

[-] elatedCatfish@lemm.ee 2 points 6 days ago

Most of the problems we’re facing aren’t solely due to capitalism… imagine if Trump and co. took power in a communist state. It would be the same, if not worse due to the structure of govt. Less guardrails there and it would be way easier to shut down any opposition from the population.

[-] Allonzee@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago

Birthrate-too poor for babies-capitalism Abortion-too poor for babies-capitalism Climate change-addressing interferes with short term profit selling dumb shit-capitalism Public education- starved into ruin to cut capitalist's taxes and maintain an ignorant workforce - capitalism Higher education-winners and losers mentality causes resentment by citizens paying for other citizens education despite society benefiting from an educated citizenry-capitalism Teacher/doctor/mental healthcare shortages-see above-capitalism Microplastics-self-explanatory-capitalism The fall of democracy-governmental capture to destroy regulation and maximize private profit-capitalism The fall of news/misinformation-More profit in pushing oligarch control serving, fear/anger appealing lies than boring truths-capitalism Needless consumerism-duh-capitalism Grind culture hell devoid of meaning or end-duh-capitalism

Whatever problems capitalism doesn't cause, it exacerbates. Unless that problem is "I don't have enough useless crap I don't need to buy yet!"

[-] elatedCatfish@lemm.ee 2 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

You’re not wrong about any of that… but any communist nation has its own problems. History has pretty much shown there is no perfect form of governance, especially when you have hundreds of millions of people living there. And why would so many people from those communist states immigrate en masse to the US over the years? Surely there’s a reason for that - lots of freedoms are afforded here that aren’t given under communist rule.

Misinformation can be just as bad in a communist nation when news is controlled by the state. Russia and China have both notably had issues with that over the years. Journalists “fall out of windows” all the time in Russia. I’m gonna reference them mostly because they’re some of the only nations with similar population size to the US.

Birth rates are dropping in places like China too due to economic struggles. Yes, they’ve gone green with electric power and all that - but they’re still one of the worst polluters in the world. And child labor runs rampant in communist countries.

If the US govt. had rewritten the constitution here at some point instead of interpreting language that no longer applies to modern nations - we would be a lot better off.

[-] smokingpistol@lemm.ee 2 points 6 days ago

Capitalism is not perfect but it’s better than any of the bullshit that’s out there. How many Full communist countries have ever worked? Even the countries that are socialist countries such as Vietnam have an open market. So any doofus that believes That 100% communist or socialist country would be better than what we live in today have no idea how things work and our fucking buffoons

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 08 Apr 2025
677 points (100.0% liked)

Fuck AI

2361 readers
790 users here now

"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"

A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS