I need to step away from my PC – for a moment – because, although I have so much to write, the statements made in this video touch me too deeply and are too closely aligned to my own views and too close to the fundamental reasons underlying my own depression and disillusionment and burn-out.

Watch it.

Seriously. Watch it. If you are well briefed on the A.I. bubble and A.I. Hell, just skip to:

  • ~ 34 minutes to miss the demonstration of the tedious issue.[1]
  • ~ 38 minutes to reach the philosophical statements
  • ~ 39 minutes to hear about deception – the universal “tell” of A.I. scammers
  • ~ 41 minutes if you’re prepared for tears: to lament what we’ve lost, what we so nearly had, what humanity is losing, what is being stolen from artists ¬

(I need some space.)

  1. I assure you this video is not about content farms, SEO or the death of search but one might be mistaken for thinking that, in the first half. Don’t. It is worth your patience. ↩︎

  • luciole (he/him)@beehaw.org
    25·
    4 days ago

    I think a lot of the people that embrace genAI do so because they’ve been drilled to embrace all new tech or risk becoming obsolete. At least that’s what I feel from my workplace: non technical coworkers nervously grasping at it, trying to squeeze the advertised productivity out of it, with the fear the competition is already doing it, and better. The mediocrity of the results are then interpreted as a shortcoming on their end so they double down.

    I’m thrilled to see someone like Freya, a passionate of maths & arts, weighing in on the matter and I agree wholeheartedly with her. GenAI is destructive in many ways, and attacking an essential part of the human experience, storytelling, is not mentioned enough.

    Every person that speaks out creates opportunities for many others to give it a second thought and question this venture.

    • barsoap@lemm.ee
      3·
      3 days ago

      Just for the sake of argument, let me turn this around half-ways: Just as guns don’t kill people, people do, so AI does not produce slop, people do. Generative AI has its uses, where it becomes problematic is when people who can’t even judge a medium use it to produce something in that medium. It’s perfectly possible to get good stuff out of Stable Diffusion, but you have to know a thing or five about visual media or it’ll dazzle you. Applies the same for all genAI I’ve ever looked at.

      Likewise, humans are perfectly capable of producing horrendous slop without aid of these tools – just look at the romance novel isle or what Hollywood was up to last year. What’s different nowadays is that it has become very easy to generate that slop, there has been an explosion of slop. If I were to imagine a silver lining it would be that people are probably going to get bored of it and non-slop, AI or non-AI, will see an increase in prestige and value. Just as the invention of photography saved painters from doing portraits.

      Bonus:

      Summarise the fable of the robot and the antipsychotic

      “The Fable of the Robot and the Antipsychotic” is a story that explores themes of mental health, technology, and the human condition. In this fable, a robot represents modern technology and its capabilities, while the antipsychotic symbolizes medication and support for mental health issues.

      The robot, designed to optimize efficiency and productivity, struggles to understand the complexities of emotions and human experiences. It encounters an individual who is grappling with mental health challenges and is hesitant to seek help. The robot, despite its advanced programming, cannot provide the emotional support the individual needs.

      Through the interaction, the fable highlights the importance of empathy, understanding, and the role of medication in managing mental health. The robot eventually learns that while it can assist in many areas, the human experience requires compassion and connection, which technology alone cannot provide.

      In the end, the story conveys that while robots and technology can enhance our lives, they should complement, rather than replace, the human touch in addressing emotional and mental well-being.