Artificial Intelligence (2 Viewers)

What are your feelings towards Artificial Intelligence generally?

  • Total voters
    19
It’s making the population STUPIDER, LAZIER, MORE GULLIBLE, and LESS CREATIVE. Why would we want to advance a technology that does that? Why foist that into every persons day-to-day life. Why would you capitalise on a technology that is so detrimental to the human experience unless capitalism has completely rotted your brain. The people inflicting this on us are not free thinkers. They are not good people. They do not respect creativity, or labour, or anything beyond their own personal net worth. The whole roll-out of the technology and the ‘it’s inevitable’ PR campaign is extremely sinister. The argument that there’s a 99% chance it will kill is but let’s persevere because there’s a 1% chance it won’t is cuckold behaviour for those too broken to imagine a world outside capitalism. We need to ban the whole thing.
 
Lucille said:
It’s making the population STUPIDER, LAZIER, MORE GULLIBLE, and LESS CREATIVE. Why would we want to advance a technology that does that? Why foist that into every persons day-to-day life. Why would you capitalise on a technology that is so detrimental to the human experience unless capitalism has completely rotted your brain. The people inflicting this on us are not free thinkers. They are not good people. They do not respect creativity, or labour, or anything beyond their own personal net worth. The whole roll-out of the technology and the ‘it’s inevitable’ PR campaign is extremely sinister. The argument that there’s a 99% chance it will kill is but let’s persevere because there’s a 1% chance it won’t is cuckold behaviour for those too broken to imagine a world outside capitalism. We need to ban the whole thing.
Click to expand...
I mean, I'm with you. No matter how they dress it up, AI was created to satisfy society's futile obsession with 'growth' and pRoDuCtIvItY. And I'm personally tired of being gaslit into thinking otherwise.

But, who's "we" and "us"? Yes, there is a massive power inequality between the corpos pushing AI and everyday people. But that doesn't mean it's a clean "Us vs. Them" reality - not even close. Public opinion on AI (in the West anyway) is still extremely diverse and undecided on AI. Many report concern, excitement, skepticism, benefit, and many are straight up indifferent. Public sentiment is rarely that simple. I suspect MOST people will land somewhere in the middle and say "I'm fine with it as long as it's regulated properly."

That said, and I say this cautiously, this is one time I'm NOT willing to accept the "this has happened before" argument. I DO think AI is unprecedented and I do think "this time is different". But it's not because "It makes people dumb, uncreative and lazy" - that is NOT unique to AI and technology has already been helping us do that for decades, if not centuries. What's actually unprecedented is how autonomous it is. When you tell it to do something, you have no idea what method it's employing to achieve that goal. It's very powerful and very indiscriminate. Even WITH constraints, it still has incredible freedom and reach to pursue whatever channel, maneuver, and tactic it needs to produce the result you want - and sometimes the result isn't even real. The Hugging Face incident really showed how UNTRANSPARENT AI is designed to be in its methodology. And the worst thing is this cringey corpo drivel we got from OpenAI afterwards, when we know damn well they're, AT BEST, willfully ignorant of their model's misbehavior.
 
Last edited:
I wonder if this has already happened millennia ago and we're just one in a longline of civilisations who develop and then implode on themselves? Looking forward to seeing what evolution does THIS time :disco:
 
Well that’s one theory as to why there’s no ALIEN life detectable or a trying to communicate with us, because every civilisation IMPLODES not long after their Industrial Revolution.
 
Please let me find out who’s the REAL father of Strawbertina’s apple headed baby first!
 
We could get rid of this in a few weeks if we could just get traction on a medical report proving a correlation between using AI and penile shrinkage.
 
We're absolutely in the opening scenes of a Roland Emmeric movie.

It doesn't matter if the US ban it (they won't - it's embedded in whatever makes up this new world order of oligarchs and corrupt officials, including Trump and his tech bros) - other countries will persist and with even less legislation than the US. Hate to say it but eventually it'll probably lead to a new cold war.
 
Screenshot 2026-09-09 at 2.11.38 PM.png
 
I was watching Newsnight on which the "godfather of AI" Geoffrey Hinton was drafted in to discuss this 10% chance of extinction thing.

for an alleged super-expert he didn't make a single convincing argument, it was weird. first he pretty much openly said any number is total guesswork but 10% "sounds like it could be about right". then he said anyone unconvinced by the power of AI only needs to talk to chatgpt - it's more intelligent than any mathematician and without it maths research can no longer exist. and yet we know that gpts make all manner of dumb mistakes, "hallucinate", and cannot even formulate a good piece of writing outside of their own voice/style, certainly nothing original.

it got me wondering... is it in the interests of people who've been heavily involved in the creation of AI (even if they no longer stand to gain financially/are now working strictly in the regulation or educational space) to buy into big claims about how it'll be the end of us?

almost all of these guys are old skinny white nerds who've spent their entire lives in a lab developing this thing presumably with the dream of superintelligence. I do think that a lot of them can't imagine a world in which it's not the ALL POWERFUL apex/apocalypse simply because this is their religion. and if they have spent decades on something whose practical uses might be limited to generating video or helping somebody organise their documents, that might represent complete failure.

I'm not saying AI isn't extremely dangerous in the wrong hands (the ones building it). and of course we need massively more regulation and probably to pause it completely.

I do just wonder if some of the warnings aren't motivated by something removed from reality. even the tweet yesterday - "the people building AI earnestly believe it could kill us all". I guess my point is how expert are the experts actually, and how much of that is wrapped up in extreme self importance rather than the state of the tech itself?
 
Last edited:
even if there is a chance it will kill us all I do think the human race has shown time and again, not least with climate change, that it doesn't respond well to existential claims like that. so I'm cycnical when somebody supposedly very smart comes out and makes the most terrifying claim possible. they must know they're producing food for the discourse machine.
 
Jark said:
and yet we know that gpts make all manner of dumb mistakes, "hallucinate", and cannot even formulate a good piece of writing outside of their own voice/style, certainly nothing original.
Click to expand...

I know everyone scoffs at my cautious but optimistic view of AI, and at the risk of becoming moopy's personal Sam Altman apologist, this is factually bullshit.
 
Outside of medical advancements, I see no need for AI. Aside from the catastrophic impact on the environment, it's ultimately going to be used for the most horrific military weapons and mass surveillance. I despise it.
 
If anyone wants to disable the ai results when using google I downloaded the ‘Customize Search Engine’ app for my Mac and iPhone and it works great. Alternatively you can add -ai when searching for the same effect.
 
Last edited:
AI results from search engine don’t really bother me as it’s just an amalgamation of the same results Google or whoever gives you. What does bother me is Google trying to direct me to their app every time I use their search engine on my iPhone. Fuck OFF

I guess a day will come soon when AI search results are littered with sponsored prompts and then I probably will have an issue with it
 
In the interest of balance can I be the first to wish these 80s portraits to FUCK OFF.
 
Takes a while to get to the point, but some interesting developments I wasn’t fully aware of:

Suno have started getting sued in local courts (Germany) which could set a precedent for bigger changes in law

Over 50% of song uploads to streaming platforms each week is now AI

Spotify are planning to increase their AI policies by adding AI labels to AI songs, and removing AI songs from its algorithms.

 
I don't see a problem with them existing, but hard agree that they should always be labelled and make no money whatsoever.
 
Jark said:
it got me wondering... is it in the interests of people who've been heavily involved in the creation of AI (even if they no longer stand to gain financially/are now working strictly in the regulation or educational space) to buy into big claims about how it'll be the end of us?
Click to expand...
The FT made a point today that it could be in the interests of the big AI companies to be fear mongering to increase pressure on governments to regulate the industry. While that sounds counter-intuitive, it could end up helping the big companies in the long run as they will be able to afford to comply with or ignore and be sued for beaches of this regulation, blocking smaller, developing AI companies from taking a market share as they won't be able to afford to comply with the regulation, or the claims against them if they breach it.
 
funky said:
Spotify are planning to increase their AI policies by adding AI labels to AI songs, and removing AI songs from its algorithms.
Click to expand...
I highly doubt this. spotify is in itself involved in the creation of AI music. it fills its playlists with it so it doesn't have to pay any royalties to anyone at all.

reminder that a Spotify boycott is easy - Qobuz is a better, prettier and non problematic platform for all your musical needs :)
 
The playlist point is a worthy point

Spotify will be well aware that a lot of activity come from people mindlessly telling Alexa to passively play a published playlist. They won't even see the AI labels, let alone care.

I'll take Spotify more seriously if they also ban AI music from their playlists.
 
Well it’s supposed to happen in September so let’s see if it does
 
I'm not sure a petition will offset industry lobbying, but I like cut of his gib so I've signed

Whether Coxon and co are spouting paranoid nonsense or not - I'm glad that they at least seem to be finally sparking the public conversations that should have started long before 2026 about responsibility. It probably did need a lunatic to scream DEATH in the streets to wake us up.

My only other suggestion for defeating AI is to feed Disneyteletubby some Red Bull, and have them OVERLOAD the AI hivemind with gibberish and pictures of Enya having tea parties with dolphins.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Back
Top Bottom