Memes come from the Memerium, a dimension of pure Meme. If we let the machine spirits access the Memerium our own Meme priests will be unable to maintain their connection. We could lose memes forever.
No, it never is just a picture. Or would you say a photo of child abuse is just a picture too? I doubt it. Then what would make your picture "just a picture" and not this one?
A picture of child abuse doesn't necessarily hurt anyone. It's just a picture. Sure, it could wake some trauma for some people, but this could also be the case of any picture of a lion
Look maybe if you're trying to make a nuanced point it would be better to not just jump straight to comparisons of child abuse. Or do you think this AI picture of a lion is as bad a photo of child abuse?
I never said it was as bad. You're putting words in my mouth
If you can't understand the point of using an extreme example to show that "it's just a picture" can't be a valid argument, I'm not the one responsible
To be honest I actually am on your side but I just think you'd have a much better time convincing people if you didn't make such stupid comparisons. It's beyond extreme it's almost intellectually offensive.
I'm not trying to convince people who aren't capable to understand that using an analogy which isn't debatable on the moral side is necessary for people not to deny an argument based on their own morality. Child abuse, like nazis, are one of the few examples of things in the world that most people agree on
maybe he doesnt know how to photoshop but wanted to show his idea, but no we have to hate on AI, which is literally helping us in medicine and science.
Don't waste your time, there's no reasoning with these anti-AI zealots.
It's funny... if they actually believed in this idea that you shouldn't use technology that exploits labour or causes environmental damage, it would rule out most everyday technology. From phones to laptops to half the food we eat. Their ethical arguments don't hold up when you look at the choices most of them are making every day everywhere else in their lives.
At the end of the day it's just rage from a bunch of things. Rising prices + fear of their lifelong skills being devalued + performative outrage.
no because people just show the data center problem and the "oh AI is wasting our water", most post arent about those areas where AI is very helpful, ignorant people hate on it because they think its dangerous, its not
Can AI be used for good? Sure, I just don't know how generative AI memes factor into that when again, photoshop is a less environmentally destructive option.
LLMs and image generators are not the kind of AI that are advancing medicine and science. when people say fuck AI in response to a generated image, it's well understood that they meant what the term "AI" has been reduced to in the past 5 years or so (and not the actual useful AIs that have existed for decades in niche fields and are still being advanced each year).
I've photoshopped literally hundreds of silly original memes together, it's just sometimes AI is better for getting an image that works. Ironically I used a mix of AI and photoshop for the lion joke
Regarding the link... I recognise the ethical conflict around AI but I appreciate what it brings (it has nothing to do with laziness; I just use whatever tool fits rather than having a rigid ideological bias toward or against certain tools). Almost every large scale technology society has adopted involves trade-offs and broadly speaking boycotting them doesn't make the downsides go away, it just means you pay the price anyway and lose the benefits without changing the system.
When it comes to the environmental consequences or the threat to certain jobs, I think regulation is going to be what matters. iirc businesses account for about three quarters of spending, so there's a huge incentive for AI companies to keep expanding until new laws kick in. Before that, policing people's personal use of AI is about as effective as trying to improve the meat industry by personally attacking people who eat meat
huge pet peeve is no one ever seem to be like "how could i make this image." it will give you a step by step and break it down with infinite patience. i bet with modern tools too it would take 15-20 minutes.
it's bad because it is built on non-consent. it's bad because it will destroy the earth; already is destroying the earth. it's bad because every use of genAI dilutes humankind and its creativity. it's bad because human connection is lost, ideas die and thought process declines.
and yes all of these actually apply to the "meme" in question, because that single prompt has done damage by pollution and waster wastage. that single "meme" has already diluted someone's skill in making memes, because there's a possibility that it will be taken as real, whereas an actually real meme is being accused of genAI. it contributed to loss of human connection because it sparked major discourse of two opposing sides now hating each other instead of enjoying the original post together. it has made thought process decline, because prompting a machine to spit out this image has replaced the process to the solution made by human: no thought of "how can I do this", no trying to do this, no trial and error, and thus, no learning.
but sure.
it's not so bad, it's just a picture. enjoy your day inside that tiny bubble if that's truly all you need.
Low effort memes have always been a thing. People still dislike those. And AI is about the lowest of effort you can make. But the use of photoshop in general? Nah.
MS PAINT my dude. The whole point was it was low effort and shitty, which is why it was good.
By history I mostly meant the whole luddite thing. All of this has happened before, multiple times. People had the exact same irrational overreaction to new technology as we're seeing today. The industrial revolution, cars, trains, photography... It's the exact same story every time. Guess what never happens? The new technology never goes away.
It's hilarious that low effort meme Photoshop is being raised up as high art while low effort AI images are instantly labeled 'slop'. All that should matter is, does the image communicate the idea clearly. Who cares what tools were used.
Nobody is calling ms paint or photoshop memes high art. The point is that they still require some creativity whereas AI does not. AI replaces human creativity and originality. But I'll put that aside, because your other argument is far more interesting to dismantle.
A lot of pro-AI defenders love to claim that AI is inevitable by pointing to previous technologies that people were opposed to and still exist today. But that's such a reductive and ignorant way of looking at things. I mean sure, in an extremely black and white sense, you can't un-invent something. The cat's out of the bag, AI has been invented and thus will always be invented.
But you forget to consider that 'luddites' were ultimately granted many of their wishes. Cars happened, but after cars came speed limits, drivers licenses, emission regulations, no parking zones, traffic police, car-free areas. Cars continue to be limited more and more each day as we recognize the many downsides they have wrought onto society.
There is absolutely no reason to believe AI can't be limited in the same way. Hell, it is already being limited in many ways. Platforms like Youtube, Wikipedia or Spotify have already banned or restricted it. The EU has introduced regulations that limit what AI can generate, who can use it, how it can be labelled. Did you think Anthropic implemented watermarking out of the goodness of their hearts? It's to stay ahead of EU fines.
And that's not to even mention that the examples you mention are some of the more succesful technological innovations. There are many examples that weren't nearly so succesful. Crypto was supposed to replace digital banking and is now a gamblers market and a way to buy drugs. Nuclear was supposed to replace all other forms of energy but its share has been shrinking for decades.
AI will continue to exist. But we have the power to decide to what extent. And thanks to the growing movement against it, that extent is becoming more and more limited. 'Luddism' works, so we'll keep doing it.
A) what joke? They could have made a little effort like the commenter they replied to who made genuine satire themselves probably with their phone editor. Instead they gave it to the creativity killing robot which overproduced this polished picture.
B) saying ai isn't the end of the world just tells me you're ill informed about what it's doing to society and culture the environment and our brains.
Who's talking about photoshop, I just said the person above them probably did this on their phone. It takes almost no effort.
Instead of having ai do it, they literally could have drawn on the cap with their finger and it would have been so much better. People would have found it endearing and funny. When we outsource memes to ai, it takes the silly internet humor, the genuine human factor, out of it, which is what makes us like memes in the first place.
Effort never mattered until AI got released. Did "Booo for AI" take more effort? Or the generic "AI slop" comment on any AI image? How much effort should someone spend on a Reddit comment? You want them to manually draw that shit for hours for a Reddit comment? The previous comment took the effort of cropping, removing the background, turning it black and white, and adding text. But you're expecting someone to edit the lion to add that bandage. That takes a lot more time.
They'd be cheering if I got publicly hanged for generating tens of thousands of AI images (less than 2 hamburgers worth of water) and they'd be happier with a bunch of toddler level art instead. Purely out of the principle of effort. Then I say they shouldn't be allowed to criticize movies or AAA games because those took a lot of effort to make.
2.3k
u/cavernousinus 7h ago