- cross-posted to:
- antiaialliance@lemmy.blahaj.zone
- cross-posted to:
- antiaialliance@lemmy.blahaj.zone
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/post/46123456
That’s how I felt waking up this morning (as of posting). Who else can relate?
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/post/46123456
That’s how I felt waking up this morning (as of posting). Who else can relate?
Do you not see how incredibly broad your definition is compared to wikis or mine? I agree that wiki definitions often use qualifiers in order to avoid making absolute statements, but wiki and I absolutely do agree about this.
I am struggling to take your claim of simple miscommunication seriously. The context of the gen ai debate that’s been raging for 3+ years is not in flux: we have all been saying the same things about the same chatbots, and the idea that anti-ai people just hate medicine or weather or animals or whatever is just… deeply disrespectful and annoying. You can at least just learn what we’re opposed to, before defending ai from attacks and arguments that were never made and would be silly to try to make.
You accused me of conflating AI with generative AI while an entire community continuously conflates generative AI with an amalgamation of corporate interests and its irresponsible use. The wiki avoids using absolute statements because that is the proper way to communicate.
What is disrespectful is putting all the relentless work of AI researchers into the same pot you use to criticize capitalist interests.
I’ve been perfectly clear where I stand, you have been cherry picking definitions to suit your argument this entire thread. I have never conflated gen ai with corporate interests, you can see from my profile that I’m against chatbots of all types, open or closed weights, cloud or local. I am arguing against generative ai, all generative ai, as I have been doing for years. You are making excuses to avoid any self reflection about your chatbot use.