Didn’t care when the arts and humanities were being scraped dry, but suddenly they’re all coming out against it now that they’re going after the sciences
Didn’t care when the arts and humanities were being scraped dry, but suddenly they’re all coming out against it now that they’re going after the sciences
Nerds ≠ techbros.
One has been publishing research about environmental impact of generative AI datacenters since 2019.
The other has been going on twitter talking about how “chatgpt will replace the artists.”
One invents math that can recognize cancer cells.
The other applies it to security cameras for the surveilance state.
In general, the people most critical of AI have been those that trained their own one at home for fun, and knew from beginning how fucking overhyped it is.
Cal Newport does a great job illuminating the distinction between the marketing hype and the technical reality. I’m sure most here are familiar with his views, but if not: https://inv.nadeko.net/watch?v=jxM35ij5VGg
Yeah, I can also see how somebody who might see a use for AI in their own field isn’t exactly for up it stealing work in theirs or others.
There’s a difference between “hey, we can train/build this tool to be useful to us” versus “we’re cool with it ingesting everything and barfing out cat pictures”
I remember when the media tried labeling Luigi Mangione a techbro instead of a tech worker. Researchers and programmers are not techbros.
I wish this applied to me, but I never got any ideas to have fun with AI and there were enough things more interesting that I couldn’t get the time. And now, I don’t have the computing power to make any significant thing.