AI is best used for helpful tasks that would otherwise be unfeasible for individuals, like predicting maintenance on rail lines so resources can be dispatched to repair issues before they become fatal. I don’t really see much use in any of the public facing uses of it.
this post was submitted on 05 Jun 2025
24 points (92.9% liked)
chapotraphouse
13866 readers
872 users here now
Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.
No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer
Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
No. It's all bad, all the time.
I think it’s good for quickly parsing and looking up text, but that’s about it
Interesting thing is, that’s not actually AI but increased compute allowing you to do more quicker
While “varying degrees of hostility” seems valid, I don’t really agree in most cases.
“AI” is a very useful predictive tool especially in like biochemistry, but gen AI for images, especially using corpo models, is a really horrible use of it.
Trying to generate an image using a pixel by pixel based model is like trying to approximate pi using a simulation of sliding blocks, counting collisions. Will it work? Yeah. Is it very accurate? Not really unless you waste a shit ton of time and processing power.
The energy cost alone is a significant reason to despise AI generated art, but add to it the fact you’re using other people’s work without crediting them, and the fact that using and hyping up this art encourages other corpos to build their own models, wasting even more energy and practically DDOSing sites to scrape data…
Doesn’t seem like this stuff is very redeemable.
I guess I don’t have anything against personal models trained on data with permission from the artists and run locally. Hell, if you know the style you want, it’s best to train with just that style and not all the art on the internet, but if you’re already putting in that much time, you could probably just pay an artist or draw it yourself.
(Don’t tell me I chose the wrong instance lol I’m aware)
but add to it the fact you’re using other people’s work without crediting them
fuck copyright law fuck intellectual property it's bad because of who owns it not because it scraped the commons.
A trick I use for drawing when I have a hard time visualizing a character is to first use any type of dressup game, then draw how I think the character should look lik, and finally make the character's clothing/hair/accessories actually make sense
I think the robots are way better at making surrealist art than people are. The bizarre, creepy, morphing shit that gets posted on boomer social media is culturally important.
yeah that shit is fascinating several people will get sociology PHDs writing about it
Nah
LLMs are only good at one thing: auto complete.
Anything else is ass.
No. But I do appreciate how it helps people, specifically those who may not have the time or patience for the arduous years of practice art skills usually take to hone, to create and visualize things that would otherwise be stuck in their head.
But it doesn't tho. There's like 0% chance the AI gets it right, it gets "close enough". I mean I'm not gonna flip my shit over using AI to generate Shrek does 9/11 or whatever but that's stlll just AI slop. Get on MS Paint and crudely draw it in there for all I care, at least it means somebody gave enough of a shit about the concept to put literally any amount of effort into it.
I also think that AI is great for general comedy purposes, whether that's audio, video, or meme images. I've seen great uses in this way whether it's the various AI U.S. president videos where they make them say silly shit, or the Jack Black Elden Ring movie trailer that was posted here recently.
I hate to go to bat for Jack Black but generating photorealistic images of somebody half naked is unethical even if it is him and it's not exactly sexual. I know expectations of privacy differ between hollywood stars but how would you feel about this?
Basically, if AI is used for stuff like that, I don't think it deserves the same hostility as when it's used in it's worst possible ways (Tech bros putting far too much faith in it and replacing people, usually leading to their regret).
There is genuinely good uses for AI. Speech transcription via an LLM is a good idea for contexts where it's not life or death, so, most of them. AI Search Functions for big huge databases can be very good because they "understand" context and it can expedite a lot of research. But that's boring logistics instead of hilarious AI slop
There's like 0% chance the AI gets it right, it gets "close enough".
That's true for just throwing prompts at a black box and slapping "generate" like it's a slot machine, but in the same way that LLMs are good for like OCR, speech-to-text, or transforming existing blocks of text but terrible at generating things from whole cloth, image generating AI is fairly good at merging composites together or otherwise transforming an extant image. AI assisted rotoscoping like ebsynth (which uses provided keyframes alongside a video to rotoscope the rest of the frames) is also extremely impressive, more so than the dogshit full AI video generation I've seen.
Local, open source AI models are fascinating and potentially useful in the right hands in a way that proprietary corporate models running on remote servers are not. The problem is that the AI hobbyist community is like >90% irredeemable garbage ranging from fascists to pedophiles to grifters, along with a quite a few people who are just too cringe to be allowed.
anything created by ai is the opposite of art and is inherently worthless
wild nature isn't art but it's still beautiful.
the generative AI i'm most interested in is when it's gone on too long and the errors start accumulating into something more interesting than the prompter's intent. try to make a 20 minute prog song with those music shitters and just give me the last 15 minutes after it's gone to hell and glitches out.
Wrong.
Ai is bad even the "good" uses of it are just making the bad uses more effective.
I think its awful and never should’ve been created. Nothing will be the same, it completely trivializes our existence and I fucking hate it
Maybe our current form of existence needed to be trivialize to evolve past it?
Similar to sex work discourse, viewing the subject through different lenses leads to different end conclusions.
Viewed through a lense focusing on exploitation or liberation, environmental or psychological impact, or even through the lense of an AES state versus a Capitalist state in decline all will support different opinions.
It gets a lot more simplee if you view it through the lens of what it will actually be used for which is exploitation, extremely potent disinformation that will absolutely cook the average American internet user and continuing to boil the ocean to mine even more fake than regular currency currency.
That's the point. Viewing something through a particular lens simplifies the issue by ignoring parts of the conversation. A dead hypothesis can be comfortably ignored.
You won't get bogged down in a convesation or argument that ignores the 99% of Hitler that was genocide related to focus on the 1% of Hitler that was not genocide related.
what if i just want to talk about shitty art
No worries, I'm not the boss of your mouth. I can't tell it what to say.
For the purposes of propaganda or a conversation where you're wanting to change somebody's mind (or just let them know they are unequivocally wrong), put the goggles on.
(that was a joke about the non-genocide 1% of hitler, which did double duty in a post about gen ai)
slaps self in foreheard
Forgot about the art thing.
I found a YouTube link in your post. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy: