this post was submitted on 27 Apr 2026
1179 points (98.5% liked)
Technology
84200 readers
4343 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
People don't want to hear it anywhere because you're lauding the benefits of a parasitic technology which is inherently hostile towards workers.
And if you're getting paid for it, it makes you a parasite too, or at least more complicit than the average person.
Maybe your position would be better served by not lashing out at people as if they're your enemy.
Multiple things can be true at the same time. Statements about the technical capability of a technology don't detract from the negative impacts on the world. Those are two different topics.
Fossil fuels have incredibly massive, civilization-scale problems that are actively harming the modern world AND ALSO have enabled industrialization, pulling billions out of poverty.
AI is objectively capable at some tasks AND ALSO is being used to disrupt the labor market and causing other harmful effects in society.
The world isn't black and white
OMG adult balanced take with no detectable outrage
I'll see you in Sort By: Controversial
Black and white, no, but things can be evaluated on their net impact. And in that evaluation, AI is shit.
I understand the arguments, today isn't my first day on the Internets.
The comment that was responded to was in a conversation talking about the technical capabilities and how it doesn't matter what the truth is on that topic because some people don't want to hear it because they only can view AI in a 2-diminsional, black or white, net good or net bad way.
Then you showed up like a caricature of the type of irrationality that they were discussing.
I even explained the, very obvious, context that you breezed right passed and yet you're still grinding that same talking point without a moment of self reflection.
Viewing things for their net impact is not "irrational" just because you don't like the conclusions reached.
woosh.gif
It didn't go over my head. You're just wrong.
I honestly think, it's very cool for prototyping ideas at this point. It's also parasitic. Although I think because of (maybe) different reasons: It gives people the power (which they unfortunately use way too much) to imitate an art, but in an non-arty imperfect way that doesn't comprehend details (of the art), resulting in slop. For software that can go very wrong as we see here. This is also a reason why I mostly quit open-source, because now everyone can code a bad version of a library, it sucked the art out of good open source etc. and it's increasingly difficult because of good wording/"look" etc. to differentiate on quality of code, previously you could often check a code-base review it somewhat and know how good the quality is, now it's more like "is this slop or not?" (in which case I go a big circle around it, because reviewing is often not worth it)
At some point though, I think this automation of work is inevitable, we need to think about a society that can peacefully exist without having the requirement to work to exist. I actually think this could easily be utopian, everyone can focus on what they actually think is fulfilling life.
Though, it's sad and concerning that technology is developing faster than society can adapt, which is why I'm mostly with you, because people (or representatives like politicians) just aren't "programmed" for these fast-paced changes, to adapt the technology such that the future may be more utopian as it currently is heading towards a dystopian future...
Is it okay for Skrillex to make loops? For Vanilla Ice or MC Hammer to sample?
Every commercial use of AI negatively impacts the environment in order to further the interests of capital and is therefore inherently immoral.
If we were in a nuclear fusion or otherwise all-renewable-energy-with-plenty-of-excess world, then I'd be more aligned with your mindset and agree that only uses which bastardize art / etc are immoral.
The fact is, it can be a very useful technology when deployed sensibly. Yes, it's going to inflict massive harm on society in multiple ways - but just dismissing it as shit is putting your head in the sand. We need to be figuring out how to ensure that the harm it does is minimised and ideally that it's used in ways that benefit us all. Fuck knows how though.
But it's not just going to go away, no matter how much we might want it to.
It destroys the environment inherently by virtue of its operation (in the context of our current energy infrastructure). I do not care how "useful" it is to you or any corporation if it takes even a single living organism off of this earth.
I dismiss it as shit and I don't need your approval to do so. Medical and scientific applications are acceptable. Nothing else, no exceptions.