I recieved a comment from someone telling me that one of my posts had bad definitions, and he was right. Despite the massive problems caused by AI, it's important to specify what an AI does, how it is used, for what reason, and what type of people use it. I suppose judges might already be doing this, but regardless, an AI used by one dude for personal entertainment is different than a program used by a megacorporation to replace human workers, and must be judged differently. Here, then, are some specifications. If these are still too vague, please help with them.

a. What does the AI do?

1. It takes in a dataset of images, specified by a prompt, and compiles them into a single image thru programming (like StaDiff, Dall-E, &c);
2. It takes in a dataset of text, specified by a prompt, and compiles that into a single string of text (like ChatGPT, Gemini, &c);
3. It takes in a dataset of sound samples, specified by a prompt, and compiles that into a single sound (like AIVA, MuseNet, &c).

b. What is the AI used for?

1. It is used for drollery (applicable to a1 and a2);
2. It is used for pornography (a1);
3. It is used to replace stock images (a1);
4. It is used to write apologies (a2);
5. It is used to write scientific papers (this actually happened. a2);
6. It is used to replace illustration that the user would've done themselves (a1);
7. It is used to replace illustration by a wage-laborer (a1);
8. It is used to write physical books to print out (a2);
9. It is used to mock and degrade persons (a1, a3);
10. It is used to mock and degrade persons sexually (a1, a3);
11. It is used for propaganda (a1, a2, a3).

c. Who is using the AI?

1. A lower-class to middle-class person;
2. An upper-class person;
3. A small business;
4. A large business;
5. An anonymous person;
6. An organization dedicated to shifting public perception.

This was really tough to do. I'll see if I can touch up on it myself. As of now, Lemmy cannot do lists in lists.

I was originally going to put this into the Log, but it might be unwelcome.

You want a way to rattle image-generation Boosters? Most of the arguments they use can be used to defend Googling an image and putting a filter over it.

• "All forms of media take inspiration from one another, so that means it's fine to Google another image, download it, and apply a filter to call it mine!"
• "Artists are really privilieged, so it's morally OK to take their art and filter it!"
• "Using filtered images I downloaded from Google for game sprites will help me finish my game faster!"
• "I suck at drawing, so I have to resort to taking images from people who can draw and filtering them!"
• "People saying that my filtered images aren't art are tyrannical! I deserve to have my filtered images be seen as equal to hand-drawn ones!"

AI Boosters use a standard motte-and-bailey doctrine to assert the right to steal art and put it into a dataset, yet entice people to buy their generated images. When Boosters want people to invest in AI, they occupy the bailey and say that "AI is faster and better than drawing by hand". When Boosters are confronted with their ethical problems, as shown above, they retreat into the motte and complain that "it takes tons of time and work to make the AI do what I want". Remember this when you find Boosters. Or don't, since I doubt the sites where they lurk are worth your time.

First of all, this c has absolutely skyrocketed in the coming years. I made it in a panic. (I was worried that AI would bedazzle everyone, everyone would be onboard, and it would ruin everything forever.) Although a lot of what I feared didn't happen, I'm still glad to have made this thing.

I don't know if this sub is going to be brigaded by Boosters like it was early on, or if they'll try some sort of cyberattack, but the reason I appointed so many moderators was because I was worried that Boosters would come in, try some bad-faith tactics, and screw over any resistance against AI.

I now realize that having a pro-AI "camp" is misleading. Adopting any new technology must prove itself to be worth its cost. There have been patents, like Flexplay, or Tetraethyllead, that are not worth their cost. What Boosters are saying is that, if you oppose the use of Flexplay of Tetraethyllead, you are in an "anti-Flexplay" or "anti-Tetraethyllead" camp, and if you can't come up with a convincing argument against it, you should just accept the technology.

Since it's been a while since my last log, and the c has changed, I don't think this will be brigaded.

It's really cool seeing all this old stuff. These are still downloadable, by the way.

After seeing the enormous attention that has been given to this community, I'm glad to present this list of articles lost in the early years. I'm not sure if it has been purposely sabotaged, or if people just didn't like it. Some of it shows a lot of hope.

Just like the bourgoise attempts to get a surplus value out of the proletariat without compensation, so too does the AI Prompter attempt to get a similar surplus value out of an artist. Maybe it is the same thing! The articles marked by a letter M (for Marx) will describe this process.

Adam Savage's Issue With A.I.-Generated Art

Tech Bros Have Built A Cult Around AI | BEHIND THE BASTARDS

Law enforcement struggling to prosecute AI-generated CSAM

(M) In Cringe Video, OpenAI CTO Says She Doesn’t Know Where Sora’s Training Data Came From

AI Hype Wall of Shame

(M) The AI Revolution is Rotten to the Core

(M) AI Is a Lot of Work

How much electricity does AI consume?

(M) OpenAI Just Gave Away the Entire Game (Archived)

Meta’s ‘set it and forget it’ AI ad tools are misfiring and blowing through cash

Cory Doctorow: What Kind of Bubble is AI?

(M) AI Startups Are Suddenly In Big Trouble

(M) Artists Sue Google Over Its AI Image Generator

Now the Humanities Can Disrupt “AI”

If you have any missing articles, comment it for a second version of this post.

P.S. If the Invidious link doesn't work, switch the instance.

P.P.S. After searching for the best articles to include, I noticed that the pagation for Lemmy needs a "back button", tho, I'm pretty busy with other stuff.

Video by Adam Something. Sponsor ends at 3 mins 7 secs.