this post was submitted on 16 Nov 2023
135 points (93.0% liked)

Technology

59597 readers
3395 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] theluddite@lemmy.ml 92 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

At some point in the last decade, the ~~ostensive~~ ostensible goal of automation evolved from savings us from unwanted labor to keeping us from ever doing anything.

[–] wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 37 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

It says something important about this "revolution" that it's starting with replacement/replication of art, not labor or manual drudgery work.

[–] Poggervania@kbin.social 29 points 1 year ago (2 children)

If this whole AI craze was actually about replacing labor, I honestly believe it would have started with firing and automating CEOs.

I’m not even saying that as a “eat the rich” shtick - AI is great at analyzing huge datasets and determining a conclusion from the results. It would obviously need refinement, but that would probably be the major role I could see it immediately taking over.

[–] nicetriangle@kbin.social 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I've worked at places where the CEO being removed without a replacement would have had the company run markedly better. So replacing a CEO with just a license to stock ChatGPT would be a net benefit to probably a significant number of corporations.

[–] Sabre363@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 year ago

Except corporations aren't meant to make a profit, they're meant to make the executives at the top a profit. Everything else is just a mechanism to do that.

[–] there1snospoon@ttrpg.network 10 points 1 year ago

If AI begins to replaces CEO’s then the whole fantasy of capitalistic meritocracy with the most ‘skilled’ or ‘educated’ earning their place at the top falls apart.

This will not happen unless it is forced to.

[–] jackalope@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Except in fact we have just seen 2 centuries of drudgery automated. Have you seen a combine harvester?

[–] Roundcat@kbin.social 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So many machines, yet I'm working more hours than my ancestors.

[–] jackalope@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

And your ancestors also subsistence farmed and didn't have all the technology you do.

Look I'm as big a critics of our modern capital-industrial system as the next person but it's crazy to not see how technology has made people more productive and given us more wealth.

Also the idea that peasants had lore days off is sorts debunked: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/kks6tq/comment/gh4oh5c

It is however quite true that people during the industrial revolution itself were working way more hours than previously which is why the whole labor movement kicked off. We appreciate the gains of previous ancestors fighting for our labor rights.

Could things be better? Certainly. Is automation being maliciously targeted towards art and creativity at the expense of not increasing productivity and reducing drudgery? No.

[–] demonsword@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

it’s crazy to not see how technology has made people more productive and given us more wealth.

it's a crying shame that the lion's share of all that wealth is parked at the pockets of the 0.1%

[–] jackalope@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago
[–] tillimarleen@feddit.de -1 points 1 year ago

“ I'm as big a critics of our modern capital-industrial system as the next person”

Evidently

[–] AnonTwo@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Does it? I'd imagine it just makes sense that the tech used for AI in art would be used for art.

I don't see how it would be used for labor without a bunch of other steps.

And as also pointed out, there's tech that, while not specifically "AI", is used to replace labor.

[–] tillimarleen@feddit.de 15 points 1 year ago (2 children)

as a luddite you should know that automation‘s goal never was to save us from unwanted labour. But of course this would have to be accomplished first, before your second assumption can ever come true.

[–] magnetosphere@kbin.social 11 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I read an article (probably linked to from here) about how “Luddite” isn’t the insult many people think it is. Luddites weren’t dumb, or superstitious and needlessly afraid of technology.

The historical Luddites were knowledgeable regarding technology. They weren’t anti-technology in general, they simply didn’t trust the rich and powerful to use it in a way that genuinely benefited society as a whole. Unfortunately, capitalists did what capitalists always do - they used machines to churn out inferior goods and cut worker pay. That’s why Luddites destroyed/sabotaged machines.

After learning that, I started considering Luddite a compliment.

[–] tillimarleen@feddit.de 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Cool! I‘d also see it as a compliment. That‘s why I was surprised that a fellow luddite would interpret it differently. Alas, it was just this little word that made us stumble. But yeah, the Luddites knew that machines weren‘t evil. But that they would be used to generate more profit and not to lessen their toil

[–] Jaded@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 year ago

Languages evolve overtime. It's very much an insult these days.

[–] theluddite@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Yeah I agree. That's why I said it was their ostensive goal. Their actual goal has only ever been profit.

[–] tillimarleen@feddit.de 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

ah, now I get it. You meant ostensible goal

Edit: I also had to look it up )

[–] theluddite@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Oh huh TIL. I also looked it up, and it seems like a real doozy of a word. I had no idea. Looks some some dictionaries say that the two words are interchangeable, whereas others distinguish between them, and in the latter case, I used the wrong one. Language is fun!

[–] magnetosphere@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

“'Inflammable' means ‘flammable’? What a country!”

[–] tillimarleen@feddit.de 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Haha, what’s this from again?

[–] magnetosphere@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It’s a classic, from way back when The Simpsons was good.

[–] tillimarleen@feddit.de 1 points 1 year ago

Thanks! Nice to reminisce.

[–] PipedLinkBot@feddit.rocks 1 points 1 year ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

The Simpsons

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.

[–] Jaded@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You can still build a garden by hand even if it's commercially done with machines. It will be the same with drawing, voice acting, etc.

The problem is and has always been capitalism and the rich that abuse of it, not automation.

[–] theluddite@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Not if you're too busy between your two jobs manually training the LLM models and supervising the supposedly autonomous cars to make rent.

[–] donuts@kbin.social 39 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (14 children)

Holy fuck. Nobody fucking wants this shit.

Edit: The minute AI generated trash music or videos start showing up in my feed I'm buying new drives for my jellyfin server and never looking back.

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] magnetosphere@kbin.social 22 points 1 year ago

This isn’t creepy at all. Nope. Not one bit.

[–] RedWeasel@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I thought I saw an article that said that they were cracking down on this. Now they are doing it?

[–] AceFuzzLord@lemm.ee 12 points 1 year ago

The large companies don't want anyone else using it unless it's them.

You make an AI deepfake of [Insert Celebrity Name] and they'll make sure you know they're crying like the babies they are by trying to sebding (a) cease and desist letter(s).

If they do it, they'll just laugh at the profits they're making off it.

[–] edgemaster72@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

They want to make sure you're using their tech for it

[–] a_mac_and_con@kbin.social 10 points 1 year ago

As uncertain as I am about the technology, people already steal voices from voice actors, singers, and celebrities. At this point I’m just glad these artists gave their permission.

[–] ZILtoid1991@kbin.social 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Butlerian jihad noises intensifies

[–] DarkenLM@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

In realistic terms, I don't think the Butlerian Jihad would have that much of a chance. I'd bet on Skynet and it's Judgment Day happening first.

That is, when AI truly exists. Right now, we have essentially gargantuan amounts of glorified if-else spaghetti.

[–] ZILtoid1991@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

If-Else spaghetti with Markov-chains!

[–] catarina@kbin.social 8 points 1 year ago
[–] Gork@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I wouldn't mind if the AI integration could help augment out Waze's celebrity voices. They don't speak the street names and this could be one spot where it can fill in the gaps around their real voice.

I think we should make Kevin Hart sit in a recording booth until he’s said every street name in America. I prefer artisanal celebrity voices to the processed ones.

load more comments
view more: next ›