Report Blog Entry
Something that really grinds my gears is people saying things like "SAY NO TO AI" or "AI IS RUINING OUR ENVIRONMENT" (for the second one, I'd say that GENAI is ruining our environment. And on that note regarding AI vs GenAI, there is a huge difference between AI machine learning/LLMs (GenAI) and AI as a whole). I have seen at least 4 people during my time on SpaceHey with a pinned blog saying that "if you use AI, as in ANY KIND of AI, don't friend me"! To me, that's an absurd statement, because if everyone was honest and knew what they were talking about regarding AI, then no-one would be friending them, because everyone uses AI (more on this below.) So before I delve into my thoughts and opinions, the less click-baity topic sentence for this blog is:
TODAY, GENERATIVE AI (GenAI) IS USED FOR BAD, NOT AI AS A WHOLE.
AI is not bad for creatives, in fact, it is one of the best assistive tools for video games, music, and general content creation, because AI is defined as anything in computers which can facilitate decision-making that mimics conscious thought. We have been using AI for decades. There are many types of AI, and not all AI is GenAI. Speaking of, GenAI has only been widely implemented since 2023. Don't believe me? Here's a list of examples of the ways that you have been using AI:
- Your favorite video game uses AI algorithms for you to interact with NPCs. Minecraft uses AI to generate new terrain and control mob behaviors. Every game involving randomly generated NPC quests uses AI - that includes GTA and Animal Crossing. Every game with a boss-fight that responds to where you, the player, are, and what you are doing, uses AI!! That's practically every game under the sun. And for anyone who plays Roblox, do you know what dictates the front page's game recommendations? AI!
- Your favorite editing software uses AI to upscale images and remove blemishes. (This is sometimes done by using GenAI, however if the training data was from GettyImages etc, it does NOT infringe IP laws and is therefore completely legal and moral.)
- Your favorite music software uses AI to remove white noise from samples, or to change the tone of your voice. This also applies to voice changers. (EDIT: AND FOR ALL THE VOCALOID FANS, this applies to YOU too!)
- Text-to-speech uses AI to generate a human-sounding voice. Your favorite TTS YouTubers or TikTokers use AI daily.
- Your favorite social media app uses AI to recommend content to you. YouTube, TikTok, Tumblr, Bluesky, practically everything... okay, maybe not SpaceHey, but can you really tell me that you only use this website for online entertainment.
- I mean, people, CT and MRI scans use AI!!!! Not GenAI - AI!
So what I'm getting at is that AI is not some monstrous demon spawn out to get you. Stop fear-mongering and urging people to stop playing "X" video-game or "X" software because it uses any kind of AI, when it's not even the type of AI that people are campaigning against. GEN-AI (generative artificial intelligence) committing IP (intellectual property) theft is the real issue. Please understand the difference, and refrain from feeling disgust or the urge to cancel someone every time you hear the word "AI" because it's nothing to scoff at. It's the backbone of social media and most of the popular video games you use today.
So... Generative AI. Let's get into it. GenAI's main appeal and differentiator from basic AI systems is its machine learning capabilities - the ability to improve and rewrite its own decision-making in real-time to produce something. My favorite pet sim game ever, "Creatures", is powered by adaptive AI (IMO it tiptoes on being GenAI), and it was made in the 90s! Modern medicine is utilizing GenAI algorithms to detect cancer in human bodies (okay... maybe this isn't widely accepted, and I get why - however I'm an optimist when it comes to medicine). Hollywood is now using ethically-sourced GenAI training models to develop better CGI technology. Disneyland even made an Olaf animatronic this year that taught itself how to thermoregulate using GenAI.
However, notice how all of the ''positive'' GenAI examples I've brought up in the paragraph above (or about as positive as it can currently possibly be) have used ethically-sourced training data, because that is the only cut-and-dry legal way to do it. What isn't definitively legal is people typing prompts into GenAI, which then spits out a Frankenstein-ed image based on the 1000s of images it referenced... that weren't acknowledged alongside the final generation. It could have generated an image that it based off of a digital artist's online portfolio, or a professional photoshoot done by real humans. And what do these humans, which were the direct inspiration for the image, get in return? Nothing. Meanwhile, AI-generated images that don't pay or even acknowledge their reference images claim that they make "original art" when that's not true at all. So this, combined with the fact that certain GenAI data warehouses owned by huge mega-corporations are HORRIBLE for local environments makes GenAI a morally negative AI to use in the present day for 99.999% of contexts.
Legally, the real problem is when the AI image-generating companies collect online images for GenAI's training data (the data that taught it how to "draw" in the first place) but don't compensate the artists fairly. A recent example is people calling the YouTuber SamDoesArts' semi-realistic style the "AI art-style", when in reality it's GenAI that stole his art style from him. And sadly, he hasn't seen a dollar of what GenAI image generation sites like ChatGPT have made from GenAI images based off of his art. He hasn't even got a formal recognition from OpenAI at all, or the other AI-generated image websites. As an artist as well (although mainly traditional), I completely agree that this is a horrible practice and should be stopped. The fact that OpenAI hasn't even publicly thanked or mentioned the (UNWILLING!!!) contributors to GenAI's training data is insane, and borders the line towards illegal in some countries that take IP violations seriously. GenAI has also been used to generate undoubtedly illegal images, which I will never condone, but thankfully several governments have already cracked down on these criminals with jail time.
(Extra reading:) I won't even try to get too deep into the murky waters of GenAI chat-bots - that's a whole different can of worms. Obviously I hold it in a very negative light, and I haven't touched ChatGPT or the works for years, and I graduated salutatorian last year. I know that this is wholly experience-based knowledge, but a lot of my successes in high school I genuinely attribute to some of my classmates' brains rotting from ChatGPT overuse. I am not joking. At least 10 of my classmates spammed pure AI-generated paragraphs for their assignments worth more than 20% of a subject. In the moment I was glad some of my competition was eliminated, but looking back on it... This is a sign humanity's next generation is not up to the task of managing society. I'm confident AI LLMs rot people's brains when used as a crutch. When I have kids, they are not touching ChatGPT with a 10-foot pole. If they have a difficult math problem to do, they can search up the trusty Khan Academy repository, thank you very much. Also, any English literature report they haven't studied up on can easily be done in a night using LitCharts so I'm not hearing it!!
I've seen kids ages 12-15 struggle to write a single sentence for creative writing without consulting www.chatgpt.com. Same goes for ANY kind of STEM subject... I shudder to think what the quality of my medical care will be in a decade when all the LLM hacks somehow make it out of med school. Using it to think of quick slogans or diary prompts wouldn't hurt IMO (excluding the environmental damage which is pretty damning in it of itself), but if you have extremely low impulse control, I wouldn't risk it. Every time I see my little sister asking ChatGPT what the answers to her homework are, I die a bit inside.
TL;DR: No, AI is NOT bad, you mean generative AI. I'm aware of GenAI's insanely awful track record, but I think it's important for us to be mindful of the language we use. Many creatives use AI in a moral and legal way (for GenAI this would mean ethically-sourced training data and data centers that don't completely suck a neighbourhood dry of its water supply), so it's not fair to bunch them up with the people who train GenAI with intellectual property that they stole. This was written as a brain-dump but I am studying digital IP law in college so I may have some more legal insights than the average Jane or Joe. However, I did not go deeply into environmental issues in this mini-essay because I'm not well-versed on the subject, so if anyone has any additions or addendums feel free to share in the comments :)
Comments
Displaying 8 of 8 comments ( View all | Add Comment )
‧₊˚☁️⋅Cloud⋅☁️˚₊‧
Hii, I was checking your profile when I saw this blog, and it prompted me to share some thoughs, I hope thats okay :)
As someone with a disclaimer for ppl who love ai not to friend me, I agree with the sentiment of this blog. I fear the conversations surrounding artificial intelligence hold too much nuance to cover concisely, and the limited nature of social media makes it even more difficult to address it all.
The first thing wrong with how we approach AI is the way we refer to it. This way of talking results in two things: Lumping all artificial intelligences together as the same thing (when AI has been a thing for a loong time and takes different shapes depending on its purpose, just not how we percieve it now) like you said. And in second place, making us unconsciously feel like it is actually intelligent, and not just a model based on countless mathematical predictions, therefore we feel threatened by it, especially when its currently taking ppls jobs away as the greedy ceos look for just another way to be "innovative". Language creates realities, and by using the wrong terminology we are changing the way we percieve the world.
It frustrates me to no end that theres no short way of communicating to others the fact that you 1. understand the complexities surrounding it all 2.You do not vilify all AI (personally, many of my interests can involve some type of AI, like vocaloid) and understand the role in which they are needed 3. You are against generative AI that unjustly steals data in order to fuel itself... and 4. The thing you disapprove of the most is the current sensationalism surrounding how ppl interact with it. They get too dependent, too careless, or too cocky, and with many countries going back to more conservative governments it also helps to the devaluation of the arts.
oh and also 5. You are fed up with everyone trying to do things more efficiently therefore incorporating AI into a process that was already simple and does not benefit in any way from the inclusion of it.
In the end, you just have to say you hate AI and hope ppl get the sentiment behind it... not a very effective method.
(from now on when I use the term AI please note it refers to generative AI with the information provided above taken into consideration, because if I had to repeat all of this each time I mention AI we would be here for AGES)
AI doesnt really think, so is it right to assign it moral connotations? When most people speak abt the morality of AI, they do so more while commenting abt the mentality of an average user of these things, or the ceos, not the one of the algorythm.
I feel like generative AI is not a thing the general public needs, they either do dumb stuff like fruit love island, or use it to do things that could be perfectly done without it. Before 2022ish it wasnt even mainstream anyways. If chatgpt and all its copies disappeared right now (aside from the economical impacts) I wouldnt miss it at all, and I think most ppl wouldnt.
I could also go on a whoooole other rant abt AI in art, which to me is a different can of worms...
I also think that is worth to note the water shortage that AI has had a direct impact in. I cannot talk for the whole world, as I am not knowledgeable enough abt that, but I am aware that currently there are many who are suffering the effects of having data centers right next to them, and the fact that it has profusely lowered their quality of life. To be fair tho, that speaks more about company greed rather than the moral implications of AI, since there could be more eco friendly solutions to the problems that datacenters carry, but they dont care enough to do anything.
But also, AI had a direct role in opening the pandora's box from which escaped the neverending greed from tech billionares. What before was a scifi dream of having a technocracy of the elites is day by day a more tangible reality for them (just look at peter thiel), there are instances in which they talk about their ideologies and cosmovisions that are truly disgusting, and those are the men in power. It would be ignorant to fail to aknowldege the role of AI in this shift, its just fuel to their god complex.
Hope my ramblings made any sort of sense, and hope you have a good day!
*to clarify, billionares being greedy is nothing new. But AI sort of made it much much worse, or at least much more obvious
and alsoo, I forgot to mention my disclaimer is there to deter users whose whole entertainment consists on dumb images created by chat gpt, to keep away ppl who have warped perceptions of art due to the constant use of AI (think of AI art bros) and have developed some sort of superiority complex towards arts and humanities in general and those who have a strange obsession with the way its rapidly evolving, treating it as the pinnacle of human creation. Because Im an artist (and for my peace of mind) I prefer not to interact with ppl like that.
Ive seen irl the things a reliance on AI does to ppl and their intelligence. An example being my own dad, so i just wish to step away for a brief moment. Especially since irl its harder to ignore.
by ‧₊˚☁️⋅Cloud⋅☁️˚₊‧; ; Report
I am in awe (and in total agreement) with everything you typed out on here! God, I wish I mentioned vocaloids as a general use for AI that isn't generative or harmful to the environment. Great example.
Also I'll just restate this paragraph you wrote above because it perfectly encapsulates my thoughts on this topic:
"The thing you disapprove of the most is the current sensationalism surrounding how people interact with it. They get too dependent, too careless, or too cocky, and with many countries going back to more conservative governments it also helps to the devaluation of the arts."
Exactly! Humankind's hubris overshooting what they can use emerging technology for. Though currently GenAI is a net-negative for society, it isn't bad in every instance either. GenAI was used to teach the robots at Disneyland how to move and articulate itself; no-one is going to try and melt Olaf the snowman... are they?! lol.
by jasmine; ; Report
Also I completely agree that GenAI in the form of LLMs ruin people's drive for problem-solving when overused. Both my sibling and mom use it all the time; let's just say they would be better without it
by jasmine; ; Report
snowman
very important distinction to make, thank you for saying this! I do hold hatred for generative ai, how it discourages a person’s creative prowess. I hold a distrust towards its accuracy and dislike the misinformation it creates, but ai in the broader set is definitely not a bad thing!
I’m not aware of genai being used in medicine, but I do know there are machine algorithms that are fed a large amount of real cancer pictures and then help speed up the process of distinguishing possible cancer symptoms when doctors have to read through a large amount of patient data, which is really, really useful. it’s a practical use and saves time and resource, which should be encouraged and developed.
notcatfart96
TRUTH NUKKEEEE
al1cja_Ang3lduztXxx
every1 focuses on the environmental effects (which r important!!) but they disregard the societal effects. people are legit marrying ai and going into psychosis/killing themselves because of this stuff. it encourages isolation away from REAL people and avoidance of meaningful relationships because the chatbot 'meets' those needs. i instantly assume any1 who supports gen ai doesnt care about people at all, esp w the rise of incels n young people turning to the internet/ai chatbots for advice and support
XxBull3tsSl4mming1ntoD33rSk1nxX
really baity title
In what way is it clickbaity. "AI is not bad" is a widely held opinion, and most people on the internet are group thinkers that can't even explain what AI is. Most people don't even understand the difference between AI and GenAI. Don't believe me? OK, look at this post about NON-generative AI and read all the comments saying "AI slop" meanwhile it isn't generative AI at all and was made to help PC users.
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DWwbl-akYXH/?igsh=ejZvc3VxMzBhZWo1
Ask yourself: is it truly a clickbaity title, or do most people get riled up from a completely valid statement just because they treat AI like a buzzword (proving my point if you read this blog)?
by jasmine; ; Report
because wide majority of the world recognizes the difference and when we say “ai is bad” it is very obviously referring to generative ai due to the ridiculous amount of harm it causes. it’s like saying “i don’t like bacon” and that implies you dislike eating it, there’s no reason to assume the person saying that dislikes everyone who eats bacon, you think “man this guy dislikes eating bacon.” same way you hear “i hate ai.” you’re gonna thing “man this guy hates generative ai” because ai has not caused gigantic problems until recently. it’s a baity title meant to lure in people who are negatively affected by generative ai, or well anyone for that matter. its like seeing a title saying “christian’s suck” and then in the actual post you discuss a few examples of christian’s who suck that aren’t disagreeable upon. you’re gonna have a fuck ton of christian’s click your post.
by XxBull3tsSl4mming1ntoD33rSk1nxX; ; Report
"because wide majority of the world recognizes the difference and when we say “ai is bad” it is very obviously referring to generative ai due to the ridiculous amount of harm it causes."
Who is "most of the world"? The people who are tech-savvy enough to understand AI vs GenAI are the minority, period. Even when only taking into account people who are on SocMed for more than 3 hours a day, they are still in the minority. Again, click the Instagram video I attached in my reply and read the comments chock full of people harassing the creator of an AI tool because they don't understand the difference between GenAI and AI. Not to mention the amount of TikToks I've seen of people saying that certain video games are "problematic" because they use AI, meanwhile it's shit like pathfinding AI or enemy battling AI from Pokemon. You seem to overestimate the average person's critical thinking skills. I'm glad it seems you have people in your inner circle who are educated on this topic but they are outliers.
And on the bacon point, that's not an accurate comparison at all, because you're comparing the different uses that bacon has, and that only one of it's uses (diet) is bad. Meanwhile, I am not debating the different uses that AI has. I am debating the different kinds of AI, of which there is thousands - unlike bacon, which unlike AI, is not a varied concept; shocker. Of course bacon has one use for humans (which is consumption). But, can you genuinely say with a straight face, that AI only helps humans with one thing after I've brought up more than 6 creative fields that AI is used for??? So regarding your false equivalency, it's more accurate to say that I'm titling a blog, "Bacon is not inherently unhealthy", which is also true. You can create a broth or eat it in small amounts.
I ask you to read my blog in full, and ask yourself how the title isn't applicable like you're asserting. I fully stand by my point that AI isn't bad. If that means something different than I meant because of the buzzword-ification of the word AI, the problem lies with society for mischaracterizing AI in the first place - which is my whole point!!! In the current economic climate, GenAI used to replace the working class and commit IP theft is bad. Obviously. GenAI is also one of thousands of types of AI. So yes saying, "No, AI is not bad", with an asterisk at the end which signifies that there is more to add to the story btw, is an accurate statement.
by jasmine; ; Report
robin
you may be based as hell ... i hate genAI ... but i have MRI scans and i love videogames and AI is inherent in the healthcare i receive and the games i play. AI has been around longer than people understand. PacMan uses AI! that game is older than the average user of this site.
there is a LOT of nuance to the subject that people won't acknowledge - I'm a hater of genAI and not a *lover*, per sé, of AI, but I understand that I use it whether I intend to deliberately or not. We all do. I also have a friend that works with AI and has created models for improving physicians' ability to detect certain medical concerns. When used right, AI can be a good tool - just don't use genAI for "art", don't use chatGPT as a therapist, and don't talk to grok, like, ever. Oh, and get medical advice from actual doctors and not just the Google AI overview.
by robin; ; Report
I completely understand the GenAI hate but may I ask why you seem to be AI-averse?
by jasmine; ; Report
I don't entirely know, if I'm totally honest with you! I'm not exactly *averse* to it, per sé, but I feel moreso mostly neutral. There is some part of me that feels like a cranky old man and wishes that we weren't moving towards a place where everything seems to be relying on AI, but that's just one of many general discomforts I have with modern life; I miss technology from when I was a kid. :)
So in summary / for clarification; I don't like genAI, but I don't have particularly strong or negative feelings about AI being used as a tool in areas like medicine or videogames. :) I have friends that are completely against ALL AI and it's quite annoying to be honest because AI *is* everywhere. It feels like they pipe up every 5mins about how everyone should boycott an increasingly long list of services and companies just because they use AI as a tool in some way and it is... very tiresome and ignorant.
by robin; ; Report
Oh, and the examples I gave at the end are mostly just because they're bad and shouldn't be used for those things. E.g. ChatGPT has unfortunately led a lot of people to serious harm because they've confided in it instead of a real person, and the Google overview is often very incorrect.
by robin; ; Report
Gayva
there’s still time to delete this
too bad I'm not going to ✍️(◔◡◔)
by jasmine; ; Report
However I will happily add an addendum at the bottom of my blog if you point out a valid flaw in my reasoning that hasn't been addressed
by jasmine; ; Report
ancep (evil)
>large scale AI rocks up in 2022
>4 years later
>global water bankruptcy
>global dram shortage
>worst time to be an artist/musician/photographer/designer since the great depression
>automated mass surveillance rolled out across the world fining people for shit they didnt do
>governments using a chatbot to decide military actions
>low level tech jobs obliterated, quality of software drops dramatically as a result
>datacenters polluting towns so hard that its slowly killing the people who were there first
not convinced.
global water bankruptcy = i dont agree with blaming GenAI for this. golf courses alone consume more water than all of the AI data centers combined.
>global dram shortage = true
>worst time to be an artist/musician/photographer/designer since the great depression = no this isn't true and I say this as a musician. People can blow up solely on Social Media from stan accounts now or just one tiktok viral song (powered by AI algorithms btw), just look at odetari, lil nas x and pinkpantheress, and thats just off the top of my head. pre-AI algorithms meant you'd have to sell your soul to a rich millionaire producer to have people know your name and music. literally any singer before the 2000s had to do this. MJ, elton john, metallica, all had horrible corrupt producers that threatened "exposing them" via their love lives or sexuality etc to extort them. now the musicians can produce without a label to succeed by self-promo.
>automated mass surveillance rolled out across the world fining people for shit they didnt do = yes automated mass surveillance sucks. so does basically any other assisting technology that is co-opted by the government.
>governments using a chatbot to decide military actions = yes, this sucks. but it also shows that the government is at a point that they believe that they would be better off consulting a chatbot than actually coming up with political strategy on their own. this could mobilize people, and again, seems more like a government issue than AI.
>low level tech jobs obliterated, quality of software drops dramatically as a result = this is a capitalism issue, I think it's unfair to blame this on AI when historically companies have cut labor costs in any way they could. Just look at the slave trade and look now at people hiring overseas digital assistants from Africa and Southeast Asia where I'm from, who get paid below the minimum wage in most countries.
>datacenters polluting towns so hard that its slowly killing the people who were there first = I completely agree with this statement. It sucks that this happens and honestly GenAI data centers should not just have one basin that sucks out all of the water from the local environment. Most of OpenAI's data centers should be legally ordered to downsize IMO. if you read my blog it says at the bottom that I didn't cover environmental issues because I'm not well-versed on it. For my other points, I definitely agree with the sentiment that the things you mentioned are bad. However I don't agree to blame AI. AI is a tool for all and the government using it for corrupt purposes sucks, but for other institutions like healthcare, AI makes a world of difference. It is a tool that needs human supervision and ethical consideration and when those things are neglected THEN we see the downfalls of unchecked GenAI.
by jasmine; ; Report
I agree that AI is a neat tool that has some cool use cases, its just that the cost of AI is astronomically higher than the value that the average person gets out of it. People dont hate AI because they're luddites and dont know what AI can do, people hate it because all the bad its done for this world far outweighs the good; the average joe doesnt use AI beyond a google replacement and a resume printer and they NEED a google replacement because google is shit now because of, you guessed it. AI!
also the algorithms of "yesterday" are literally AI but dumber because it hadnt yet illegally scraped the entire internet and most books for its dataset, its the same tech so there isnt really a pre AI algorithm. social media still existed in 2013 and heaps of artists blew up because of that, people didnt need feeds to decide what they would watch because local artists did often get big through word of mouth and record deals. i suppose
its easier for a musician to get moderately big today due to algorithms literally forcing people into stardom on a whim but its hard to mantain that and a lot of genre's are still dominated by their respective titans from the 2010's/2000's, rap and pop especially have this problem with millennials and even a few gen x'ers still hoarding more of the limelight than is normal. also didnt touch on the artists and photographers and basically every kind of designer, they've all had a big chunk of their customerbase obliterated by AI at the worst possible time to lose their income
i also think its fair to blame tech job loss on AI when those people working those jobs would still have a job if not for AI. Hell, IBM is rehiring heaps of people because they fucked around and found out AI was not up to the task of replacing the THOUSANDS of people they laid off. Yes its the shitty management that laid them off but the tech existing is what made the shitty management think it was possible to replace them, lots of management firms will be too stubborn to rehire their workers as well so learning to code is no longer the wonder profession that we were told it was gonna be
i believe if there was a worldwide vote on whether or not to delete AI from existence and reverse its impact on the environment and economy, the majority vote would be to get rid of it. I havent even gone onto the corrupt infinite money glitch that is going on with AI companies like nvidia trying to make money out of thin air with stock market fuckery and AI companies inevitably getting a tax funded bailout to the tune of billions of dollars once they run out of money.
by ancep (evil); ; Report
Hi i just had so much thoughts about this discussion so I made a voice message because I got carried away with the word count. I talk a lot at the start and its slow to start so feel free to skip to around a half or two-thirds into the recording if you decide to listen.
My general thoughts summed up by a synopsis of my conclusion in the recording:
"I don't think it's the fault of the tech, it's the fault of the demand of the companies. GenAI is a subset of AI, but to say that all of AI is bad just because specifically GenAI infringes on IP and is currently environmentally unsustainable... That's not fair at all. As soon as the first computer was made, instances of AI were already being developed. Do you really think that people, with the knowledge of everything that AI powers today, would willingly remove all AI from our everyday lives? They would say no to that. I think that if the world were to vote for or against GenAI it would be split between optimists and pragmatists, but that's the point of my last three paragraphs; to show that it's being grossly misused at the moment. However, there is potential for growth. Personally, I'm an optimist so I hope that IP laws will crack down on AI image generation and undisclosed AI books to encourage more virtuous uses, but it's too soon to say and that's the scary part.
by jasmine; ; Report