ZILtoid1991

Heartwarming: the worst industry possible has a correct take on something for once.

FÄTHØM, the German Satanic Black Metal band, that had members all over the political spectrum, released 4 demos and 1 full album. They all killed each other once they all got too drunk and started to talk about politics instead of satanism, though police reports point to that Holocaust-denying Neonazi bassist, Hans Mann started the first blow, but last-man standing ancap guitarist Kristoffer Johannson also got fatally wounded by the end, and spent more time trying to write "fucking communist scum" with his own blood rather than to get medical attention.

Too bad that the now christian tradwife ex-wife of Mann tries everything in her power to stop these albums from further circulation, because "metal bad".

~~Make it happen then yourself.~~

They're just that underground, posers like you cannot fathom it!

How do I do astral projection?

You can just say that you believe that no one should use AI.

At least for LLMs, yes. It is the most pragmatic resistance against AI as of now, especially considering how "useful" they are.

Sometimes one extreme is the correct one. Moderation can be a fallacy too.

Because AI boosters made people believe not using AI/not wanting to engage with AI generated output is an extremist position, so you must use AI, just read the output, and maybe rewrite it.

If only it was just a Mastodon instance (was thinking about creating "Twatter", as a joke).

AI boosters are controlling the narrative around AI, and what constitutes as extreme positions on it. They made the general population believe, refusing to use AI, refusing to engage with genAI output, especially if paired with mean online comments, is extremism. Meanwhile they claim the "golden middle road" is using it as a tool, such as an already established artist using it to brainstorm ideas, use it for reference material, or use their preexisting capabilities to fix up the AI generated output. Similarly, pro-AI extremism is being downplayed to "slop posting", especially if it is paired with severe AI psychosis.

Reality:

• There are now some actual anti-AI extremists. The worst of them would not mind sacrificing a portion of the population to put the genie back into the bottle. Less severe people would just put the tech oligarchy and some AI devs in front of a Nuremberg-style trial, ban the use of LLMs altogether, force AI companies to delete any models that made without consent, try to come up with an international agreement on a global AI ban, etc.
• Pro-AI extremists are a lot worse in actuality, than just some third world guy posting AI slop as a side hustle or engagement bait, to get ad revenue money. The DOGE boys' excuse for the USAID massacre and the deregulation is that any problem, including 600 000 (!) people dying from USAID funds getting pulled, is that AI deregulation will lead to artificial superintelligence, which will lead to a quadtillion human being living in the solar system in a few centuries. TESCREAL is a fucking cult, that would be too extreme for Shin Megami Tensei, let alone the real world.
• "Moderate usage" or "rational adaptation" is often a slippery slope. I've seen way too many devs trying to use it as a "tool", only to implement things on AI hallucinated specs and similar shenanigans, with many falling down the rabbit hole of loop engineering and vibe coding, all while claiming the decreased code quality worth the "productivity gains". Said "productivity gains" don't last for too long though.
• The "I want more ethical AI" crowd are usually hypocrites IMHO. At best, they secretly run their own model. At worst, they're the same as your average AI bro with mild AI psychosis, except usually more leftist and more secretive about their AI usage. I heard that some devs who previously had issues with attributing open source code are those most likely to be in this group, though I cannot confirm due to lack of a solid evidence.
• Your average "can you please not post AI slop?" people are the real centrists.
• You're right if you refuse to use AI, you're right to not want to engage with AI slop, even if your aunt disagrees.

Yes. They think ideas are what making the art, not the implementation. That's also part why they think artists are "full of themselves": Many of them talk about them having great "world changing" ideas for art, but they're always stuff like "what if GTA was set in [insert real life city here]", or "can you hack [popular FPS] to have VR support?".

That's why I wrote "some", because it varies from people to people.

hey man I don’t care that you’ve decided to refrain from blasting ropes to Waluigi hentai for the month you can shut up now