• Sentient Loom
    link
    fedilink
    English
    18621 days ago

    “Anarchist” lololol

    Yeah, using the corporate product that stole all individuals’ work to regurgitate abortions from billionaire oligarch’s algorithms is totally “anarchist.”

    • Comrade Spood
      link
      fedilink
      English
      5521 days ago

      Exactly. I remember in Conquest of Bread when Kropotkin talked about freeing up more time by automating creative and intelligent pursuits so we can focus more on menial labor.

      Obviously /s

    • Tar_Alcaran
      link
      fedilink
      1821 days ago

      It’s not stealing if there are no rules whatsoever, which is exactly what anarchy is!

      /S

      • Sentient Loom
        link
        fedilink
        English
        3
        edit-2
        21 days ago

        There are rules. But rich people don’t have to follow them. It’s domination. Not anarchy/anarchism.

        Edit: Okay now I see the /S. Not deleting though lol.

    • @nialv7@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      10
      edit-2
      21 days ago

      Uhhh I will get downvoted but I have to say, anarchocapitalism is still anarchism. And obviously disrespecting property rights is a very anarchist thing to do, so.

      And many AI models you can run completely on your own hardware, no billionaire oligarchies have a say in what you do.

      • @ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        720 days ago

        Most anarcho-capitalists, especially the Curtis Yarvin types, just want fascism, but with Inc. at the end, and call their dictator “Chief Executive Officer”.

      • @ameancow@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        420 days ago

        anarchocapitalism is still anarchism

        Sounds more like people who want to have luxuries and comforts and money but don’t want to have anyone telling them what they can and can’t do.

        Sounds about right for the current fascist techbro community.

    • @niktemadur@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      621 days ago

      bOtH pArTiEs ArE tHe SaMe LoL aMiRiTe… i’M sUcH aN aNaRcHiSt HyUcK hYuCk HyUcK!!!

      It’s like these mentally lazy ignorant people look all around themselves, see how the horizon is basically at the same distance all around them, therefore conclude that they must be the center of the universe, then sprinkle in a few fashionable internet soundbites and catchphrases to “make themselves sound interesting” and “with it”.

    • 100_kg_90_de_belin
      link
      fedilink
      319 days ago

      Anyone who claims “AI = anarchy” deserves to have a canvas broken on its head cartoon style

    • @anomnom@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      120 days ago

      What classic art is transphobic. Lots of renaissance artists were LGB, the T came out when many of them painted themselves into biblical characters of different genders. It gets written off as because using themselves as models was more available than models, or vanity, but transphobic is far from the first description I’d come up with for the art history I learned.

    • @Xerxos@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      620 days ago

      Obviously. I mean, even when AI could not do fingers (and today they are mostly fine), you could simply recreate the picture until you had something usable.

      Having a picture like this and the over the top “negative/positive points” is done deliberately.

    • @ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      520 days ago

      I’m not sure, in its early days, generative AI slop was kind of promoted like that. Then anyone left of Margaret Thatcher rejected it, and almost only the Curtis Yarvin type techbros embraced it, so it slowly became the “anti-woke” alternative to real art.

    • @spujb@lemmy.cafeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      219 days ago

      sorry consider the bait spread i personally have the opinion that bait inoculation is possible

    • Bahnd Rollard
      link
      fedilink
      33
      edit-2
      21 days ago

      Thats the scary part, in 2023 that was a good way to identify AI slop. Its getting tricky now and you need an eye for detail and lighting. By 2027, I fear people wont be able to tell the difference.

      • @WuceBrillis@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        1321 days ago

        Next up is music. It’ll start with jingles and the background music for commercials, then background music for movies and eventually most of the beats you hear on the radio will be made by AI.

        I think the industry will still want to have real singers, so they can still make money on concerts. But the AI will be writing a lot of the lyrics for many of the big pop hits.

        Your kids will be fed this garbage all throughout their childhood, and when they’re old enough to develop a critical sense they will just be used to it.

        • I mean have you seen the slop the music industry is already putting out? Top 40 pop stars have been overproduced manufactured garbage for literal decades, what difference does it make if its one producer writing all the shitty samples and lyrics for 100 pop stars or if its AI. Real music will still exist and the true art will be confined to the fringes, as it already mostly is. Soulless music is soulless regardles of if its being made by a machine or a hack.

        • @TheEighthDoctor@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          420 days ago

          Next up is music. It’ll start with jingles and the background music for commercials, then background music for movies and eventually most of the beats you hear on the radio will be made by AI.

          Suno is already making ‘Radio Quality Pop’ music, of course because ‘Radio Quality Pop’ music is a very low bar

      • Tar_Alcaran
        link
        fedilink
        2221 days ago

        The impact per work of AI vs, say, a set of pighair brushes is massively higher.

        Which is the fairest way of comparing them, per artwork.

        • @Fisch@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          521 days ago

          Both of those things have a really small impact, to the point that it doesn’t matter. Generating one picture using AI takes like 30 seconds of your GPU running at full power. Besides, I don’t think that’s a fair comparison in the first place. Pighair brushes are not the main animal product people consume and generating something using AI models isn’t what’s using the majority of the energy but training the models is. The metric that’s actually important is what both industries as a whole are contributing to climate change, otherwise we can just keep picking examples that prove the other one wrong.

          • Lololololololololol. No. Unless you have a massively expensive GPU, no. The image is not being generated by your device. It’s being generated by a mile wide server bank that churns through petrochemicals like a city all on its own. That’s the part of AI people are talking about when they reference it being bad for the environment. And if you do own a massively expensive GPU and generate AI images offline, you are not part of the conversation because your activities are an ounce in an ocean.

  • @HappyFrog@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    3121 days ago

    This feels just like the twitter men roleplaying as women saying that they love misogyny.

    They’re using “woke” language to promote anti-woke subjects.

    • @Hobo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      721 days ago

      The title assured me that this was not satire. Since I have no critical thinking skills I’m not sure who to believe.

  • Wren
    link
    fedilink
    1819 days ago

    I pressed the demo button on a keyboard in a music store once.

    My second album will be out next month if anyone is interested.