I getting more and more enraged seeing self proclaimed leftists resorting to ghastly Gen AI to bastardise their rather humorous ideas.
I ABHOR how normalised AI has become on platforms around the World Wide Web
It's lazy and a ultimatumon effort and autodidatic capacity.
You are actively resorting to waste hydropower energy and drag us into potential water shortage pandemonium just to lobotomized what could've been a perfectly good joke.
This is one of the online exertions that treasonous vermin Trump wants you to enact to entail his horrible totalitarian deforestation and greenhouse gas emissions .
Stop appeasing to that oligarch genocide funding clown and his immoral calavry of fascist oppressors who operates utilities that are primarily made to pollute our ecosystem and increase climate change and ocean levels raising.
If I ever see another shitty No-effort AI Picture like this again, I will actively and violently scratch out my eyes with a rusty garden weasel wrapped in mint condition barbed wire and sandpaper the wounded sockets shut so I could never see slop take control of meme subculture.
Is it that sophisticated to edit Trump's head over a keyboardist's anatomy?
121 replies
Your writing is shit, buddy.
At least it isn't AI.
I'll take irritation fueled spelling error littered rants over a succinct, correctly parsed AI slop response any day of the week
I'd rather be a lousy illiterate doofus than a gutless GPT-reliant hypocrite.
How can you tell? It might very well be considering how many fancy words were used there. Nothing about that reads as not-AI.
One of my fellow journalists writes like this. We have to tone it down for publication. A lot.
Bro fell out of the thesauraus tree and hit every branch on the way down
Maybe use an LLM to clean it up
Ouch. The stupid thing is that this existed 4 years ago too. This doesn’t have to be anything AI. We’ve been photoshopping since the printing press was a thing.
What a misplaced post to rant about a tech that may have nothing to do with the picture.
Then they will be yelled at for that. There’s no winning for someone like them. And someone else in the thread still said it looks like AI as it is.
It’s like Joey with a thesaurus.
I can't tell if it's a joke, it's so comical.
IKR, But i have sincere communication deficiencies and struggles to paraphrase sentences.
I'm a fucking prolapse to the reproductive system of the queen's English.
It's been enlightening to see how many people lash out at you personally, using the sleights they hope you'd consider most offensive, in response to your opinions on a technology.
this is what these people want Lemmy to be: post something thoughtful about a topic you're passionate about. every comment is attacking you personally, insulting you, and picking at the way you expressed yourself. they're not even disagreeing with the sentiment, purely just dont like a stranger's communication style and can't help but make their own unexamined reaction everyone's problem. i wish these people would get off Lemmy
Excellent contribution and a shining example of lemmy discourse.
This post looks like it was written by an ai that had a stroke.
Chatgprrrrrrttttrrrlll...
Not reading all that. Free Palestine!
No reason to read it.
OP is more than mildly annoyed.
Yelling from his front porch. Shaking his fist. While reposting slop.
"It’s lazy and a ultimatumon effort and autodidatic capacity."
dafuk
AI.
Do people just turn off spell checkers now? Or, completely ignore them?
You heard them!
the - sau - rus
As with pollution, the biggest contributers are not the individual consumers.
No, your AI prompts aren’t causing an energy crisis
They still contribute by counting as usage to help justify more datacenters for training.
Even just cloud storage uses a surprising amount of energy. I’ve my students calculate a price per rick roll just to start seeing that there are actual energy costs and usage associated with things like google search, storing a cloud file, etc. I forget the paradox name, but we’ve made storing files and the cloud (that is, using other people’s computers) so easy and efficient that we are now using even more energy.
So... how much is it? It must be significantly more than a goatse.
Doesn't count nearly as much as all the water used to farm alfalfa in the desert for the Saudis. AI sucks, this is just a way for corporate AI to push blame on consumers. They want people to push this line cause it's catchy and easily countered.
Views on AI have nothing to do with left or right. It's actually split right down the middle on both sides.
But the left wouldn't be the left if we weren't fucking fighting each other all the time instead of the right.
Idk... Anarchism and ML have history lol
Lmao in one sentence you perfectly exposed why anarchists hate MLs. Aside from all the historical bs, anarchists are just expected to go along with ML because it's "better than capitalism", but you'll never see any ML giving any ground to anarchists.
Ironically that makes you quite similar to liberals, who always want the left to support them but never give any ground :)
Personally, I can fight more than one thing at a time. But since you don't think that's possible, why are you more focused on fighting anarchists in your comment than capitalism? Is this projection? Are you a liberal? 🤔
Yes and no. AI (the ideal) is labor replacement, similar to the first industrial machines. But instead of manual labor, it is replacing cognitive labor. Under capitalism, when profit is always the end game, labor saving tech will not be used to liberate, but to further exploit the people and rape our planet. This is no different, I think. Usually this kind of capital is held mostly in the hands of one class of people, but this tech is unique in that it has the ability to, once trained, be copied and iterated on by others. Open source, or eventually hacked. Software yearns to be free, in the sense that it can be copied easily. Point is, control over the development and distribution of AI is so difficult that even the "common sense" right* end up feeling betrayed. It mainly benefits the far right and the oligarchic class.
For now, it is not the ideal. But the intentions of the most powerful people seem to continue to race towards unregulated, privately controlled AI. They talk of slowing down, but I don't have my hopes up after everything that's happened.
The ironic thing is that this post reads like it was written by an AI trained on only thesauruses.
Thesauri? Thesaures?
Thesauropods
Thesauropedes
The nerdiest of dinos.
Let me guess, people were supposed to edit and rewrite the AI output to "make it theirs"!
I'm not pro-AI if that's what you're asking.
Bro, this would just be the top spot in photoshop battles. A skillset that used to be really really accessible is now no longer even fun because well-done results will be considered gen AI.
Also, your writing seems like an AI prompt that says: be outraged at AI, make every mistake.
Yep. You need to make them shitty now.
Jesus christ that text post was mildly infuriating. Please slow down and use words you both know how to spell and how to use in a sentence.
kthx.
Right? Maybe they should use AI.
Credits to pmjv
Honestly, just take a generic picture of any band and just use paint or gimp to slap their faces on. Hell doesn't even have to be good
Make your own version and post it in the comments.
Can we also talk about how his #1 song is promoting heterosexuality? More than 80 % of children who heard Shape of You in the 2010s now identify as heterosexual, and it continues to air on the radio and show up on streaming services without as much as a content warning. What the fuck?
Copypasta?
All this cultural exposure is making me too heteronormative. How dare they influence me without consent!
Why would you need a warning about promotion of heterosexuality?
Also make sure to censor the language in the warning.
Ok i can't do it with the markup rules, I suck
They're being facetious because people say that about stuff with non-heterosexual content.
Honestly there are bigger fish to fry, and the world isn't black and white.
Sometimes you have to fight fire with fire.
I'm sure theres a few other idiom's I'm not thinking of.
A bad photoshop or paint would do the trick too. Abd arguably it would be funnier too
I agree. I'd also accept microsoft paint level quality.
Whoever made that could have easily done it with basic photo editing skills instead of AI. Even if it didn't turn out great, it would still show that a person cared enough to try doing it themselves.
Who cares? It's a meme. You look at it for a few seconds and never think about it again.
Why spend time with an editing tool for something that gives people a quick laugh and makes you zero revenue?
That doesn't excuse using the plagiarism machine, sparky.
Did you eat a thesaurus?
You do realize they're exctinct?
So it’s still about the leftists ???
Correct me please but when we have an AI pic with Trump and Netanyahu it’s still about the leftists?
OMG the irony of using AI to rail against the use of AI.
Bluesky leftists really like using AI for some reason
The industry paid a lot of money to influencers like Taylor Lorenz to do some entryism.
Maybe they have phones.
I liked the imagery of you scratching your eyes out.
Don't mind the people shitting on your writing! It's fine.
Also, I wonder about this. I don't like using GenAI for a few reasons, one of them is the environmental impact, but it's by no means the biggest. Not even close. It really is barely a reason at all.
It's a tool... I think it's immorally constructed and mostly in bad taste, but the environment is really a much deeper failure than the individual, I think. I don't think campaigning against people using something mindlessly, ignorantly perhaps, blithely even, does much good, when you could spend that time convincing them that the big stuff, and there's big stuff like data centers if we wanna just stick to AI, should be banned or regulated to oblivion.
"Don't use GenAI" is fine, but "Data centers suck" results in the same thing and doesn't attack the individual for some perceived moral failing for doing something innocuous while surrounded by terrible shit.
Hopefully you get what I'm getting at!
My take
Not just AI, but I recognized the use of it to create music videos featuring leaders. "Iran so far away" was a very popular video from months ago that racked up millions of views on YouTube.
And the creator is about as obviously a fascist as they could be without stating it outright.
Fascists clearly do not mind anybody who just memes on the people in power.
Mint condition is probably the worst condition to be using barbed wire in the given circumstances. You have weasels ripping your flesh and shiny new barbed wire? What you're setting yourself up for is a case of rabies and for some reason leaving out the lockjaw you can get from rusty barbed wire. So you'll have a case of the rabies and not have a case of lockjaw to stop you from biting your friends.
Someone somewhere used a computer to do computer things. Boohoo 🎻
It's not humorous, it's cheap, derivative slop. This used to be a passing thought you would have on the can, accompanied by a chuckle and a fart, forgotten minutes later.
Now someone parlays the flatulence into a voice prompt and suddenly it's as much part of the record of humankind as Hammurabi's code. Fucking disgrace.
Anyone know any studies comparing the energy usage of an AI image generator vs manually photo shopping. If a person spends say a half hour on a computer finding a photo and editing it in photoshop to this quality it could cost as much electricity as an image generator.
I think people are starting to overestimate the energy usage of AI while underestimating everything else we do. Like an image like this would take my computer ~30 seconds to generate, meanwhile I'll use my computer for hours at a time to play games and don't think much of that.
It would take 30-60 seconds for one image. But the chance of getting the right one is slim. You'd probably generate hundreds, settle on one, then modify that one further. Depending on how precise you want it, it could take over an hour of GPU use. Services that do it online are doing the same thing in the background, maybe generating even more and iterating and evaluating them. All while using many GPUs at once. This isn't so bad for an image, but videos are way more resource intensive.
I didn't realize people shut off their computers after having AI do something they might not have otherwise done anyway. Brains, yes. Computers, no.
They do actually. And for the people not running local models, the idea of cloud computing is that once you're done with it, someone else takes over. If you're talking about the necessity of it all, sure, but we're also not exactly advancing the human race by being on Lemmy are we?
We appear to agree that AI simply increases the amount of energy usage rather than supplanting it, and that energy-intensive AI data centers are the norm for AI usage (such as the use OP is talking specifically about).
I'm not going to do that, because I hate it when comments get edited in such a way that the whole context changes. However, to clarify: to your reply "I didn't realize people shut off their computers after having AI do something they might not have otherwise done anyway" I answered that yes, people actually do that. If they run a local model, the model also shuts down. If they don't run a local model, they can still shut down their computer and the next user can use ChatGPT or whatever online model they use.
If we take the AI industry's reports in good faith, not counting the training, the computer the prompting was done wasn't used for other things afterwards, the AI one-shotted the image and the user didn't ask for revisions (which "anti-slop" AI boosters are against), etc.
Look.
The thing about a new technology is that once it exists, it never un-exists.
AI is here. It's never going away. Ever.
There are all sorts of actual concerning issues about AI that need to be taken extremely seriously. Personally, I could care less if it gets used to generate memes. It's not like memes are meant to look like actual, real situations that could trick people into thinking something that didn't happen did or vice versa. It's clearly for a laugh. It's not putting "meme artists" out of business because there is no industry for memes where people are putting their memes in meme galleries that people buy tickets to.
Getting mad over AI generated memes specifically just seems like a waste of energy. Like you're trying to find something to be mad about.
But here’s the question… how much could you care less?
Is 'negative' a proper value?
Blockchain is here. NFTs are here. The Metaverse is here.
Not long ago they were the 'unavoidable evolution of technology' that we were sometimes scolded for mocking.
Maybe they won't go away, ever. But that's actually not important.
Just because a technology exists doesn't mean it will be relevant whatsoever in the future - even if the technology is ostensibly a huge market with billions of dollars being poured into it, and there's nothing wrong with calling out stupid technology and complaining about it.
The AI LLM slopaverse is both a stupid business model and a stupid technology (given the amount of investment and valuations). Considering real world utility of LLMs I'd say it deserves around 1/1000th of the current investment - if rational people ran the world.
Tbh many people don't use PCs at all, and the advent of cheap generative ai for image manipulation makes this kind of creative task more accessible to those people. I hate it. I would like to put the touch screen genie back in the bottle. But it is too late.
How are people doing these so common though, the big models wont do real people
Local models?
Are they that common? There is so much of it out there, are there that many dipshit memers running local models?
Anyone with a gaming PC can spin up ComfyUI and produce an image like this with a fraction of the power of playing a single round of CS:GO.
Shit, I can generate AI images on my phone. Locally. Using 'Local Dream.'
Oh no, a rainforest burned down and the oceans turned to desert because I used my phone! /s
Reposts are very common too
The verbosity of your interlocution is positively sesquipedalian.
Love Sinead but AI/the Bourgeoisie is the real enemy.
AI and people using it to make memes are not the real enemy.
The real enemy are the assholes using it for actual nefarious and greedy purposes. Using it to make memes doesn't fall into the nefarious or greedy categories.
Using ChatGPT/Grok/Gemini/Whatevs to create memes is supporting the enemy, yes. Ultimately feeds the bourgeoisie by utilizing their services and pumping up their stock.
Mildly
I think i can sum it up a little more concisely. You can't fight the Epstein class with the tools of the Epstein class.
Great, another "AI sucks and I'm so much more enlightened because I don't like or use AI" post.
The irony of using the internet on a device to post about the energy consumption of AI while relying on that same general infrastructure and energy consumption to make and distribute the post is... rather fantastic.
If OP really wanted to make a point about reducing AI usage, there is something amusing about using an internet-based service to make that argument.
And the fact that the joke is considered unfunny specifically because it was AI-generated seems like a particularly strange criticism. Whether someone personally likes or dislikes AI is certainly their prerogative, but that doesn't really tell anyone anything about whether the joke itself works. It's a little like saying, "I don't like this joke because of the tool that was used to make it."
Oh no. Another "you are critical of capitalism and yet iPhone" post.
It's unfunny because it's lazy and cheap. The AI only further illustrates how lazy and how cheap.
You could have done this in paint.net inside 20 minutes.
So you're admitting it's no work of art that should require lots of time and effort to create?
So why not use AI? Clearly you believe memes are something that should be cheap, easy, and quick to do. I agree. Why waste valuable time making a meme? Memes should be relatively low effort jokes. So why not use AI? It's one of the least harmful ways to use AI.
I apologize for bringing your logical fallacies to light. I realize pointing them out is intellectually lazy, but unfortunately it seems necessary when they make up the basis of the rebuttal.
You're conflating the effort required to manufacture an image with the effort involved in creating the joke. The context of the joke isn't who manufactured the image; it's who made the joke. The AI didn't independently decide that Netanyahu, Trump, and Ed Sheeran standing on a stage would be funny. A person came up with that concept and used AI as the tool to produce it.
You could have made the same image in Paint.NET in 20 minutes. Great. That doesn't demonstrate that the joke is lazy, and it certainly doesn't demonstrate that it's unfunny. It demonstrates that you prefer a different method of producing the image.
And "lazy" isn't a synonym for "unfunny." If I spend twenty hours painstakingly creating the exact same image in Photoshop, the joke doesn't magically become funnier because I invested more labor into manufacturing the pixels.
If you don't find the joke funny, that's perfectly fine. But that's a subjective reaction, not an argument. If your argument is that the joke itself is lazy, then explain why the idea is lazy. The fact that the production of the image was automated doesn't establish that.
For the record, your rebuttal relies on several logical fallacies. The "you criticize AI while using the internet" comparison is a false analogy because my point was about the irony of criticizing the energy consumption of one internet-based activity while participating in another, not that you are somehow forbidden from criticizing technology you use. Your claim that the image is lazy because it was AI-generated is essentially circular reasoning because you are using the use of AI as both the evidence and the conclusion that the work was lazy. And saying that it could have been made in Paint.NET in 20 minutes is a non sequitur: the amount of effort required to produce an image does not establish whether the underlying joke is funny or whether the person who conceived it was creative. Those arguments don't establish your conclusion; they simply assert it from different directions.
Is this an AI generated response?
Yes.
This response was also AI generated.
No doofus it wasn't.
Google keyboard has a grammar and spelling check that's powered by AI and that is what I use because it's the quickest way to type all that up.
The words however are my own.
hEy cHaT Is tHiS CoMmEnT Ai?
@[email protected] in a nutshell
Gotcha
I'm happy you're happy.
Are you ai generated?
Also the fact that this is all you got in rebuttal to what I was saying is absolutely fantastic thank you thank you for showing us that you have absolutely nothing to contribute.
If you ask me, the ones doing this type of shit are either plants from the other side and/or unknowingly one of them.
I got no issue demonizing anyone and anything that uses genAI ( not the normal stuff you get from phone 10 years ago that are basically just over glorified filters, got different issues with them ) for image generation no matter the use. So I am absolutely with you on hating the image.
Lemmy try not to unnecessarily divide the left challenge (impossible)
While I do agree that AI is not environmentally friendly, the only way the hype train is going to die is when investors quit dumping money into it.
While many of you may hate me for this, I intentionally waste it. Arguing with it saying the sky is green, asking it to write code and telling it the code doesn’t work, etc.
Maxing out my free account usage intentionally by just asking pointless questions and never giving up. Every prompt drains just a little bit of these investors confidence that their investment will ever turn a profit.
Profit is clearly the only thing they care about. Hit em where it hurts.
you are not more clever than the cocaine you consume