Mastodawn

Cassandra is only carbon now 1d ago

The thing I actually wanted to say about AI today, before the whole world jumped the shark yet again.

Cassandra is only carbon now 1d ago

Anyway, @zkat warned us. Talking about whether or not AI "works" was a trap, and always was. The ethical component is all that matters, and from that analysis alone, the onus is on all of us to reject and oppose AI.

Getting mired into whether or not it "works" is bad praxis in several ways: it de-emphasizes the ethics, it opens up to goalpost shifting about what it means for AI to "work," and it's easier for the boosters to Gish gallop or overwhelm with jargon.

Cassandra is only carbon now 1d ago

Sure enough, that's where we are now. I'm as guilty of that as anyone, to be sure. But like... all weekend, there have been so many new claims about AI "working," and every one takes a lot of effort to read critically and debunk. None of them change the ethical calculus.

@xgranade One reason many people want to avoid the ethical arguments is because many people won't actually take any action based on ethics. They may claim to have ethics, perhaps even the same ethics you do, but actually changing behavior, holding others accountable, organizing etc. simply doesn't happen.

These things only happen if other considerations come into play.

I don't know how to save our democracy/civilization/biosphere if we can't get people to act on ethics.

@xgranade Example: I begged my Dad to kill his lawn for years. I admit it was a personal vendetta, because I hated mowing it as a child, it's a very hilly property and I feel lucky I never slipped and caught a foot in the mower blades. But because I'm driven by ethics, I laid out all of the harms that lawns cause. Couldn't budge him.

Finally he got old enough he couldn't mow it himself, and no professional wanted to mow the hills either. I suggested he replace it with native plants, boom! Done.

@xgranade I'm a little proud that I finally convinced him, even if it was for the wrong reasons. But because he hasn't gotten into a similar bad spot with his other harmful behaviors, it feels like there is no way to budge him. I have to wait until the harmful behavior somehow harms him. And hope that he doesn't simply deny the self-harm.

@xgranade Just to be clear, I wouldn't have tried making these ethical arguments if my dad didn't seem to care about the same stuff I do.

He loves birds and used to put a lot of energy into birdwatching, so I explained how birds are dying out without the insect life most birds need to feed their babies, and insects depend on native plants. Loving birds was not sufficient to make him take action to help them survive in his yard, until he had a selfish motive.

Fabio Tavano 13h ago

@skyfaller @xgranade in that particular case you had time on your side, environment doesn’t and for the humans that got hurt-by-Ai (except these Who lost their jobs) I couldn’t care less.

@skyfaller @xgranade What I don’t understand is that acting ethically when it comes to AI is one of the easiest things to do. You just…don’t.

@sabrina @xgranade To be fair I don't think it's that easy, the tech industry is forcing workers to use it or get fired, and ordinary people encounter LLMs / generative AI in every product being pushed constantly. For example, every time I open Google Photos they want me to use genAI to make a cartoon of myself or some shit.

Avoiding becoming complicit in slop takes a large amount of effort, beginning with even recognizing something like Google search summaries as slop (one ex-friend refused).

Kwaze Kwaze 23h ago

@skyfaller @sabrina @xgranade

Who is looking for spiritual purity to the degree of "I've never even generated a Google search summary"?

I'm sorry I don't buy this.

I think you'd be hard pressed, even on here, to find someone that would get on the case of people unwittingly using genAI toys shoved in their face in the photos app yet stopped when the issues were explained to them.

No, the problem is people will be made aware of the problems and *continue* to use and defend the toys.

Kwaze Kwaze 23h ago

@skyfaller @sabrina @xgranade
And while you can be "forced to use it" by your employer (as someone who has actually experienced this) you don't actually need to fall in line and comply so readily the way many people do. There is no way to tell you're using it beyond token burn which is trivial to achieve.

Kwaze Kwaze 23h ago

@skyfaller @sabrina @xgranade
There are probably some dynamics here that are similar to what you described with your father but lawns are also a cultural artifact from before he was born. That's an important element you're omitting.

These are toys that got popular 3 years ago.

If someone's been made aware of the harms "Just don't use it" is a perfectly valid standard to apply.

Khleedril 13h ago

@skyfaller @xgranade Too true. How many people drive slower because it is less destructive to the planet?

human_powered 13h ago

@khleedril @skyfaller @xgranade
In 1974, there was a national (US) campaign to drive at 55 mph. It was a federal response to the alarming petrol crisis of 1973.
Jingles about driving at 55 arose!
"55 saves lives."
Trucker slang included 'double nickels' (5 cents and 5 cents -> 55).

That successful campaign -- the national speed limit -- remained in effect until 1995.

It suits my Sustainability mindset to remember 55 mph, although 'drives like an old codger' is an alternate framing.

Khleedril 12h ago

@rabbit74 @skyfaller @xgranade But that was more about economics than ethics.

Lars Marowsky-Brée 😷13h ago

@skyfaller @xgranade When you allow the focus shift away from ethics, you end up arguing against people's lived experience that these tools *do* provide them with genuine utility and allow them to tackle tasks that they previously couldn't, often more efficiently and effectively (from their POV).

Lived experience is very very hard to argue against successfully.