Cassandra is only carbon now1d ago
The thing I actually wanted to say about AI today, before the whole world jumped the shark yet again.
Show threadCassandra is only carbon now1d 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.

Show threadKwaze Kwaze

@xgranade
Tangent to this I can't think of a single harmful product/technology/system where alleged critics claim to know the harms yet feel they have to add "but it works". Has there been anything in history where someone understanding the harms feels the need to insist "it works"?

I can't imagine anyone said about thalidomide "it worked but I hated it". No one to my knowledge has ever sought to "add nuance" to the discussion of coal-fired power plants by saying "yeah but they work".

Apr 6 at 10:16pmWeb
Show threadKwaze Kwaze1d ago

@xgranade Most of the time arguments from proponents of destructive systems argue that an *alternative* won't work: "We can't abandon DDT it'd be too costly", "We can't defund police, what's the alternative?", "We can't abandon natural gas, solar can't cover our needs", "I can't eat only vegetables I need protein"

I can't imagine someone ever saying in earnest "yeah ok but be nuanced, it at least works" about any of the above.

Show threadrakoo9h ago
@kwazekwaze @xgranade

I would say capitalism
Show threadcthos 🐱1d ago
@kwazekwaze @xgranade crypto? Probably crypto.
Show threadKwaze Kwaze1d ago
@cthos
Aw man, it was right there
Show threadKlaus Frank1d ago

@kwazekwaze @xgranade

Ehm, maybe bad example, but esp. for fossile fuel power plants people say that all the time actually...