That’s a lot of fucking words that all just boil down to “I have no artistic or moral integrity and no respect or regard for the value of art or the human endeavor.”
This shows me how hateful and stubborn you are. I never said (and nobody in this comment chain) that gen-AI is better then artists. Of course I agree with how unfairly AI companies treat artists and that they should be supperted.
The only thing I said was that I think gen-AI uses less power and so should be more environmentally friendly. Then you asked for proof, so I gave you a proof. The proof was based on a lot so assumptions, so it could be wrong, but it is still better then saying “I don’t like AI, so it must be worse in every way”.
It seems insane to me that most people in here refuse to admit that there could be one single perspective in which AI is better, there is one single example where it is useful…
If you have to bend over that far backwards to try to get one tiny element of something to not sound abhorrent then maybe question what the fuck exactly it is that you are defending.
Just tell me, what you think I am defending… I said that I support human artists in this fight. But everything has its pros and cons. I am defending the fact that one of the pros of gen-AI is that it is (according to my calculations) greener. It is also faster. That’s all I am saying. I am not saying these pros outweight the cons, I’m just saying, this is advantagious about gen-AI. Maybe the question is why you refuse to admit there are any pros of gen-AI and why you assume everyone who disagrees a little bit with you has to be wrong and completely on the other side of the argument.
There is nothing wrong with admitting there is something good in something I hate. For example I hate cars in cities, mainly the big ones, but I use them often, because in the current state they are the most efficient mean of transfer. I hate Trump, but have to admit, he is sometimes right…
That’s a lot of fucking words that all just boil down to “I have no artistic or moral integrity and no respect or regard for the value of art or the human endeavor.”
Go fuck a robot.
This shows me how hateful and stubborn you are. I never said (and nobody in this comment chain) that gen-AI is better then artists. Of course I agree with how unfairly AI companies treat artists and that they should be supperted. The only thing I said was that I think gen-AI uses less power and so should be more environmentally friendly. Then you asked for proof, so I gave you a proof. The proof was based on a lot so assumptions, so it could be wrong, but it is still better then saying “I don’t like AI, so it must be worse in every way”.
It seems insane to me that most people in here refuse to admit that there could be one single perspective in which AI is better, there is one single example where it is useful…
If you have to bend over that far backwards to try to get one tiny element of something to not sound abhorrent then maybe question what the fuck exactly it is that you are defending.
Again, go fuck a robot.
Just tell me, what you think I am defending… I said that I support human artists in this fight. But everything has its pros and cons. I am defending the fact that one of the pros of gen-AI is that it is (according to my calculations) greener. It is also faster. That’s all I am saying. I am not saying these pros outweight the cons, I’m just saying, this is advantagious about gen-AI. Maybe the question is why you refuse to admit there are any pros of gen-AI and why you assume everyone who disagrees a little bit with you has to be wrong and completely on the other side of the argument.
There is nothing wrong with admitting there is something good in something I hate. For example I hate cars in cities, mainly the big ones, but I use them often, because in the current state they are the most efficient mean of transfer. I hate Trump, but have to admit, he is sometimes right…