- Teetotalers: alcohol vegans.
- Straight edgers: drug vegans.
- Recycling: waste vegans.
- Solar power: power vegans.
The possibilities are infinite if you are a netaphor vegan.
Carnivores: vegetable vegans.
And jus lik that we come full circle 😂
Brilliant lol
This works so well specially for those people that refuse to touch anything “not cooked” in their plate or that is green.
- Amish: techno vegans
- Mennonite: techno vegetarians
I interpreted that as techno, as in the genre, for too long.
Incels: sexual vegans
I keep trying to eat meat but it just won’t cooperate!
It’s like taking the last syllable of the name of the hotel and tacking it onto every scandal, because you didn’t understand that it’s part of the name of a hotel, and not some sort of indicator of scandal.
The worst was the Col scandal.
(Sorry. So sorry)
Please see yourself out
Freeze! Vegan police!
Chicken’s not vegan?
- Cyclists: transport vegans
- Hippies: war vegans
- Vegans: food vegans
- Lemmy users: social media vegans
You’re hereby invited to /c/vegan, as you appear to be a Northern Hemisphere vegan.
netaphor vegan
Found an autocorrect vegan!
In my most upvoted comment. I’m hating that typo so much.
I mean “Straight edgers” is on the same level already
Recycling: waste vegans.
The Germans are probably upset with this comparison
What for a nonsense. Do these other countries not sort their waste or what? Do they not know about efficiency? Next thing you’re going to tell me they don’t sort their white, green and brown glass separately.
“AI vegans”
ffs, just publish an article with a single clownemoji for the same effect.
This is such a stupid name for this.
Abstaining from a thing does not make one a vegan. That’s not how any of this works.
I’m sex vegan. Cry about it virgins
No mayo in the bedroom? Why even bother.
Vegan aioli just doesn’t cut it
I’m a sex vegetarian gotta be a bit open
I’m a sex pescatarian. I will not be answering questions.
No animals harmed during sex…hmm
Disagreed. I am an animal.
“Vegan sex” is actually a different thing. It’s penetration but you stop before you cum.
If the human you’re fucking consented, then consuming their fluids is vegan. Hell if they consent, eating them would be vegan too.
Animals do not consent to having fluids extracted or their lives taken and flesh consumed. Animal agriculture keeps animals in filthy, torturous conditions too, which no animal would ever consent to either.
I had a fish that died by suicide. We didn’t eat it, but arguably
It was kept in captivity by you though, which is not it’s natural habitat so any choices it made were, arguably, under duress.
If you lived by a creek and regularly recognised a fish swimming by, and one day this fish killed itself in front of you- you still shouldn’t eat it as fish contain a lot of parasites and there’s very likely also something toxic in the water causing the fish to harm itself this way.
But yeah, sure, hypothetically: if for a year or so you knew a wild fish that lived in an unpolluted and ecologically healthy body of water, and one day this fish chose to kill itself in front of you. You could, if you really wanted to eat a suicidal fish, eat the fish and say it was vegan because the only harm that came to the fish was through the un-coerced choices of said suicidal fish.
It only counts when it’s voluntary, tho.
Awe so the article author has a vendetta against vegans got it.
I mean, abstaining from animal products makes someone a vegan, right? If you abstain from AI products then it would follow that you’re an “AI vegan”.
It follows, but it is also feels like click bait.
A definition of vegan is:
A vegetarian who eats plant products only, especially one who uses no products derived from animals, as fur or leather.
There is an environmental parallel, and it made me read the article to see what they were on about – so I guess it worked.
To be clear, I am very pro environment (I live in it); I just feel like this is crossing the streams of related, but completely different movements, isn’t particularly helpful.
Abstaining from animal products is just vegetarian. Veganism requires an extremely strict adherence to a very specific set of rules concerning animals.
Vegetarians can eat cheese, which is an animal product.
But it makes people come off as extremely annoying. So that’s working.
Calling them after a maligned (if harmless) group seems like a choice to paint refusing to use AI as being annoying, preachy and scorn-worthy.
They seem very determined to pressure people into using AI regardless of it’s practicality, environmental impact, or anything. Fuck this shit.
There’s been recent pushes in that regard, investment in AI shit has been enormous but the financial payoff for anyone besides hardware manufacturers remains nonexistent. So investors and corporations have recently redoubled their efforts into trying to get everyone to use it in the hopes that this somehow will make them profitable.
yeah, this is 1000% deliberate manufacturing consent
“Have you ever been called an AI vegan?”
“No… Shit no! I believe saying something like that’d get your ass kicked!”
how to belittle and minimize a very serious thing: call any protesters of it a " ___ vegan"
People just going about their business living their lives as they have for many years…
Silicon Valley: Hey fuck you. Also I came up with a dumb nickname for you.
“Newspaper which uses AI to write its articles concocts derogatory term for people who doesn’t use AI”
This makes about as much sense as calling Linux users “Windows vegans”.
Choosing to not use AI isn’t some wacky contrarian position, it’s a tame position that can easily be justified. (Don’t want to use AI? Then don’t.) If anything, trying to assert that constantly using AI for everything would be the new normal is the wacky position.
i wonder if they came up with such term to mock those who dont want to use ai and possibly actual vegans on the side.
They use to mock us with “Luddite” but the Technologists looked into that actual movement (rather than the caricature) and agreed, “yeah sure, like them”. That took the sting out of the pejorative, so they picked another mocked group to connect it with.
Maybe we should be more like the luddites, starting with data centers.
The luddites wooden shoes are not all that different from the folk that put zip bombs and other tarpits on their websites to break the crawlers.
And here i am not using it because I’m old and cranky.
I just don’t use it because it’s shit and doesn’t do anything I need any better than I can do myself in the same time.
“Hey why don’t you use this tool you don’t need? It does the thing worse than you do and also fucks up the planet in the process!”
I’m choosing to abstain because it’s shit. The ethical things are just a bonus. It produces inaccurate information and bland soulless images.
It doesn’t produce information, it produces text. Expecting that text to contain information is a fools errand
I refuse to use it because it’s shit.
We are not the same.
Yup, these things are still garbage for >90% of all applications people are jamming them into. Breathed a sigh of relief when my company CEO said he doesn’t see us using AI for more than can center routing for at least the next several years.
Works relatively well for image editing
Else yea I would agree, sometimes it’s just shoved for nothing, but 90% seems like too much
Don’t misunderstand, LLM’s are fantastic for certain applications and it makes sense to use them. But seriously GTFO my email and search results. Generated speech? Ew. Generated videos? Nah. Ordering for me at a restaurant? Just kill me.
Brave’s AI search results are pretty good
I don’t dislike AI generated videos as long as they are funny with some meta (making fun of the absurdity of what characters do for example - the brainrot potential is unlimited)
Every last bit of it? What is your stance on use of AI for tasks such as data analysis of massive sets for scientific research, or procedural automation of massive operations?
Yes, I am also frequently accosted by Google’s data analysis of massive sets for scientific research. I can’t tell you how many times they’ve forcefully inserted research analysis of large data sets into my search results.
What?
*because you don’t know how to use it
I don’t use A.I. because I’ve had nothing but negative interactions with A.I. Customer service bots that fail to give adequate responses, unhelpful and incorrect search result summaries, and, “art,” that looks like shit hasn’t made me want to sign up for ChatGPT or Gemini. For most people, this isn’t a moral stance, it’s just that the product isn’t worth paying for. Stop framing people that don’t use A.I. as luddites with an ax to grind just because tech bros spent billions on a product that isn’t good yet.
It’s fair to say that the environmental and ethical concerns are significant and I wouldn’t look down in anyone refusing to use AI for those reasons. I don’t look down on vegetarians or vegans either - I don’t have to agree with someone’s moral stance or choices to respect them.
But you’re right, LLMs are full of crap.
For most people, this isn’t a moral stance, it’s just that the product isn’t worth paying for.
Wait till you see the price of a burger in another five years.
Yea, it’s often really fucking cheap for the value, just like streaming services to an extent
You only notice AI-generated content when it’s bad/obvious, but you’d never notice the AI-generated content that’s so good it’s indistinguishable from something generated by a human.
I don’t know what percentage of the “good” content we see is AI-generated, but it’s probably more than 0 and will probably go up over time.
Shit take, the more AI-made media is online, the harder it is for AI developing companies to improve on previous models.
It won’t be indistinguishable from media made with human effort, unless you enjoy wasting your time on cheap uninteresting manmade slop then you won’t be fooled by cheap uninteresting and untrue AI-made slop.
the harder it is for AI developing companies to improve on previous models.
They all use each other’s data to improve. That’s federated learning!
In a way, it’s good because it helps have more competition
I was talking about ai training on ai output, ai requires genuine data, having a feedback loop makes models regress, see how ai makes yellow pictures because of the ghibli ai thing
Sure, that mainly applies when it’s the same model training on itself. If a model trains on a different one, it might retrieve some good features from it, but the bad sides as well
AI requires genuine data, period. Go read about it instead of spewing nonsense.
If they weren’t trained on the same data, it ends up similar
Training inferior models with superior models output can lower the gap between both. It’ll not be optimal by any means and you might fuck its future learning, but it will work to an extent
The data you feed it should be good quality though
deleted by creator
Maybe, but that doesn’t change the fact that it was trained on stolen artwork and is being used to put artists out of work. I think that, and the environmental effect, are better arguments against AI than some subjective statement about whether or not it’s good.
Customer service AI sucks, I think we can all agree to this
But if you really believe that ChatGPT and Gemini is mainly for generating art, then you’re completely wrong
