So, condemning everyone who uses AI is the new purity test for some bubbles now. And it this binary approach makes me sad and scared.
I have seen so many of these rules to define in-groups. You are eating animal products? How can you, killing the climate. You are not using the exact expected set of content warnings? How can you be so ignorant. You are shaving your legs as a woman? How antifeminist of you. You are using a car? How can you justify all the bad impact of this.
Don’t get me wrong, I have quite radical positions about many of these topics. Including the use of AI.
But I’m also part of disability communities where people rely on AI for medical help and even emotional support, knowing very well that these are symptoms of a broken medical system and society.
I have seen too often, that purity test are hitting the most marginalized, which are literally fighting for their survival.
@sophie Hear, hear.
I'm curious about AI for medical help. Could you share an example? I only hear and read about the dangerous stuff (like replacing doctors).
@sophie You know what I'm gonna throw my hat in the ring here and agree with you and other folks like @gloriouscow and @volpeon. It's honestly exhausting and the amount of toxicity and vitriol I see about AI, and is making me seriously consider taking a break from Mastodon. (https://www.librepunk.club/@gloriouscow@oldbytes.space/116224004631865768)
There are good aspects to AI. It is a tool. Folks are building new medical technology, tools to help navigate phone trees, etc.
The real problem is not AI. the tool. It's the billionare tech bros and their companies that are exploiting every resource this planet has (water, artists, electricity, RAM, etc) to fuel their delusional projects. I worry not about the existence of AI, but instead about what happens when the VC money runs out.
I'm starting to believe in a future where AI can be an equitable tool that runs locally, on your personal computer. In the same way that Nextcloud and Jellyfin can be self-hosted "cloud" platforms.It's already happening. I'm doing it today on my old work laptop. These open source models are getting good enough for it. AI is just going to be another tool in my self-hosted toolbox. And that's the way it should be.
@will @gloriouscow @volpeon WRT to medical technology: We are mostly talking about generative AI like chatbots here. I don't think they should be used in the medical field if avoidable.
Machine learning has been used for a long time in the field of medicine and research. That's something that can be properly trained for certain things. We don't need large language models for that.
@sophie @gloriouscow @volpeon I can mostly agree with that, but I know some folks who are using Gen AI to help people navigate the nightmare that is American health insurance with great success. That kind of work is extremely beneficial.
I'd also argue that using GenAI for political activism is beneficial as well. The force multiplication potential is huge. Of course with everything it's a matter of degree (furthering the general theme of this thread that we should avoid absolutist positions because they aren't constructive).
@sophie i hoped llms could be a tool when i struggle to code due to brain fog. i've had mixed results in my evaluation, but i totally understand if someone would include it in their toolbox. all of the code produced were things i have already written in some different context, so nothing new or out of my league but i really hated all the humanisation and gaslighting.
for anyone seeing this: this was done on personal projects only. one recreational project, where i toy with pe binaries, and one i haven't publically announced yet, an abuild/pmbootstrap alternative. if i write something weird or llm like it's 100% me and my brain short-circuting.
@sophie Yes this worries me as well, I even used to be this kind of condemner...
Unsurprisingly, going to therapy has helped.
Now I just avoid the technology and will keep avoiding it. But condemning people is like condemning someone for having a gambling addiction, since that's what this technology is: They hurt most the people who have low self-esteem or get easily addicted to something.
It's the companies, not the users.
@aks @sophie True, but I would caution that it's still probably a good idea to speak out against some promoters of it - if someone with a gambling addiction is trying to convince you to spend your money at a casino because it'll make you rich, it's probably a good idea not to listen to them. And if they're doing so to someone you care about, you may want to step in as well.
That is how I see a lot of pro-AI stuff - someone may be a victim, sure. But that doesn't make you a bad person trying to stop them victimizing someone else, or for trying to suggest ways they can get real help.
Joining in, encouraging others to join in, or downplaying the harms - like suggesting ChatGPT is better than a doctor - is wrong and always will be, imo.
@trekkie1701c Since I initialized a policy to ban AI contributions from a bunch of software projects, I think you are preaching to the Choir here.
Also, 'bad people' or 'good people' don't exist. That's just a dangerous concept to oversimplify humans.
Sophie
Victoria🏳️⚧️
Akseli 
☃️karolherbst☃️
Andreas Ahlenstorf
Aurimas Černius
Roland \ Willard
jane400 - 628.4 fan
trekkie1701c
Ein Philosophiker