Use tech or fund tech like Zig Programming language, Haiku OS , NetBSD which have Anti AI policies
TIL that technology can have political opinions.
I just wrote this for another post. It fits.
Freedom isn’t what they are offering, they offer escapism. And because everyone is just escaping, no one is living for reality. And even the dramas and politics are an escapist distraction sometimes, even if its sold as progression.
The foundation society built is not proper foundation, it’s not based on coexistence with the law of the universe. Because of this it requires constant patching and wars to maintain its reality.
I used to be an atheist and I still don’t trust organized religion is true religion, but the teachings of the ancients and of Jesus were the teachings of coexisting with natural law of the universe. Even organized religion manipulated the message for control of society.
We are the working cattle, we are an asset to the farm. The farmer is the nations. The farmer is offering service to be used by the wealthy for whatever they want. They purchase the farm (nation) and utilize the working cattle (citizens) to fullfil an ideology or agenda that is not in coexistence with natural law of the universe, but instead the animalistic urges of a uncontrolled human greed.
Humanity is owned. We actively funded and worked our entire lives for people that don’t care about our species. And I say that on higher level than most think. I think anyone with good intentions specifically gets manipulated and the only thing allowed is loyalty to those that own humanity or complete obliviousness to reality to the point one just consumes and works for the owners.
My thoughts is that this is going to get worse as modern tech, ai, surveillance, profiling, etc advances. It’s like there’s a nuclear arms race to get this infrastructure in place. Like the first nation to build a nation of complete algorithmic constant automated profiling in order to maintain complete loyalty to the “owners” wins the arms race and then other nations will buy the tech. And like I said earlier the people that use the nations as a service will then own the future and path of humanity completely even if they are still offering us the illusion of choice and freedom. Our choices will be made by the algorithms to pin point our psychology specifically so that we fall in line with a life path that isn’t authentically ours. This isn’t even knew, it’s been being done on an analog and primitively digital level for a very long time and is probably why we are where we are now as society.
There are a lot of causes to fight for, but I think what I’ve said above is the main foundation of that allows the bad to happen.
I think that a method of control is to distract people by egging people on to join the fight of these different causes, instead of fighting the foundation that allows the growth of the bad. This separates and divides people and make it easier for the “owners” to control society away from fixing the true cause.
I think there’s something else to say about this. When one truly understands this it equalizes people, like the military guy is the same as the homeless guy, the politician is the same as the blue color dad. Because we are all just assets for someone to abuse. Based off all the social drama in the past it’s clear this is an unwanted understanding and anything will be done to convince people to emotionally react to manufactured drama created to divide us.
Our news media is owned by the Owners, Indy media and social media sees the news media and gets caught in the drama, and then you have people thinking they are fighting for good because an independent outlet gave them the info, but it’s born from the same manufactured drama that is artificially marketed and created to sow division to keep us from understanding all that I said above.
Another debate is that if people understood this they wouldn’t work. They would just be lazy. But that’s just another false idea used to manipulate people to stay abused for the growth of someone else’s artificial unatural, agenda that exists against the laws of the universe. People don’t want to work for something that has no connection from the universe to there soul. In a way the idea is kind of like we are purposely cut off from a connection to the true power of God/universe so that we will seek it from the artificial Owners. Now that I say it, thats the same idea as gnosticism and Jesus’ original teachings and the gospels they buried. That’s why they invented priests to “communicate” to “God” for us.
You can run you own models on your own computer using KolboldAI.
There’s nothing innately fascist with GAN and Neural Network technology.
I know lemmy has a big hard on for anti-AI but a few things here:
- AI is over 60 years old and includes things like machine learning. Not all AI is generative or large language models.
- There is nothing fascist about running open AI models on your own hardware and that’s the future Cory Doctorow (mr “enshittification”) makes in his latest book The Reverse-Centaurs Guide to Life After AI. Basically he theorizes when the AI bubble collapsses it will be terrible but it will shift AI into the hands of consumers and allowing people to use AI to do work for them, rather than their bosses using AI to replace workers.
- Does using facial recognition against ICE count as fascism?
There are many legitimate criticisms against AI, especially generative models, but this ain’t one
Using logical arguments is fascist, ableist and probably racist.
That’s an ad hominem!
Largely agree. AI isn’t going away; the left needs to take a page out of Sanders and advocate instead for nationalizing and regulating instead.
Let’s not confuse “the left” with whatever the current blind AI hate is.
I’ve literally been accused of being anti-human for trying to differentiate AI from the genuine harms it is being used for. There was one post where scientists had used a specialized LLM to create novel bacteriophages, and the comments were freaking out, claiming it was super-bugs and a new bioweapon…
Please stop “the left need to…” it makes no sense, everyone i know, even conservatives hate AI
The right is too ignorant to fix anything, let alone advocate for regulation and nationalization as I stated.
The problem is that the general public has adopted “AI” to mean the current popular machine learning thing, the general category of “generative AI”, and if you want a message about it to be received broadly, you need to use terms people will understand.
In my case, I’m not aware of any GenAI models that produce useful output that I’d consider to be ethical, so I support this message.
The problem is that the general public has adopted “AI” to mean the current popular machine learning thing,
Yes, that is the problem, because people don’t understand that it’s a short-hand, and don’t understand the difference between harmful uses, and non-harmful uses. The concept itself becomes a meaningless tribal indicator of hate. “This person is acting unethically and unlawfully,” has quickly become “I don’t understand what this technology is, but when I see ‘AI’ I automatically hate whatever it’s associated with.” That is counter-productive to humanity as a whole.
So stop saying that any given technology or method is intrinsically bad, and start focusing on WHO is doing the harm and HOW.
If I’m having a direct discussion with somebody, then I’ll make it clear what I’m talking about, and if they engage in a conversation about ethics, I’ll explain why those things are unethical.
But if I wanted to post a public message to voice my sentiment, I don’t think trying to post a long explanation every time would do any good, most people would probably just skip it when they saw it’s longer than a couple lines of text. So for those cases, I’d say you have to go down to the level of current discourse to engage with the masses on their terms if you want to be heard.
But if I wanted to post a public message to voice my sentiment, I don’t think trying to post a long explanation every time would do any good
That’s a non sequitur. The initial point was “Stop using this term incorrectly, because it spreads misunderstanding and misinformation.”
Nobody said you should write a thesis per reply, and my entire point was to focus on the harms, and the actors, not the tech.
Saying “AI is unethical,” is a truly nonsensical statement. Even if we grant that AI is shorthand for LLM, is still isn’t justified as all I need to do is find an instance of an open source model being trained on public data to refute it, and there are MANY.
Unless you think that using public data to make public software is inherently unethical, which is a hard stance to justify.
If you’re upset with Sam Altman and ChatGPT, then you can simply say “Sam Altman is a thief, and ChatGPT uses stolen data.” Which is infinitely more defendable than “AI is trained on stolen data and is unethical.”
If you’re upset with Sam Altman and ChatGPT, then you can simply say “Sam Altman is a thief, and ChatGPT uses stolen data.” Which is infinitely more defendable than “AI is trained on stolen data and is unethical.”
The issue is, I’d say the same applies to every model that produces useful outputs. LLaMa, Anthropic, Grok, DeepSeek, whatever else is out there. If you tell somebody that the LLM they’re using is unethical, they’ll nust go use another convenient corporate model.
And “public data” is not enough for me, because that typically means scraping copyrighted content from public websites, I’m not aware of a model that uses only data with permission (either explicit or granted by the license) that’s useful, and the people who need to hear about ethical problems with GenAI especially don’t know about that.
The issue is, I’d say the same applies to every model that produces useful outputs.
That you know of. Your lack of awareness is not an indication on the stance of the technology itself. If you have a problem with Grok, as I do, then condemn Grok, Twitter, and that pathetic man child that owns them.
If you tell somebody that the LLM they’re using is unethical, they’ll nust go use another convenient corporate model.
Yeah, so actively fight against these toxic corporate activities. Fuck OpenAI. Fuck Google. Fuck Twitter. But the instant negative reaction to their shared tool is getting quite a few additional people caught in the blast.
And “public data” is not enough for me, because that typically means scraping copyrighted content from public websites, I’m not aware of a model that uses only data with permission
Again, this is an expression of your ignorance, not reality.
OLMo 2 was trained on Wikipedia and other fully public forums. Its training sources and data is fully accessible and open.
GPT-NeoX is an untrained model that you can train yourself. It’s literally just the foundations anybody could use.
Pythia is fully open source, and one of its training sources was GitHub. Which does genuinely bring in to question whether or not you can use GitHub to train AI. Personally, I don’t see how branching a repository is any different than using the code to train a model. But the current anti-AI trend has people EXTREMELY sensitive to this concept.
Again, this is an expression of your ignorance, not reality.
OLMo 2 was trained on Wikipedia and other fully public forums. Its training sources and data is fully accessible and open.
Decided to check out the first example quickly. It’s hard to dig through the information, but following the chain of sources:
In the first stage, which covers over 90% of the total pretraining budget, we use the OLMo-Mix-1124, a collection of approximately 3.9 trillion tokens sourced from DCLM, Dolma, Starcoder, and Proof Pile II.
As part of DCLM, we provide a standardized corpus of 240T tokens extracted from Common Crawl
So, it’s using data from Common Crawl. What data, exactly? That’d be harder to dig up. DCLM has a repository, but they don’t make an effort to point out how, or if, they’re filtering the data.
What I can quickly find is information from Common Crawl itself, which is the ultimate source of data. On that I can immediately see only two things:
- They have an opt-out list, and from what I understand, they’re scraping websites by default, providing mechanisms for you to block them or opt-out… If you’re even aware they exist.
- According to their stats page, they have 313423 pages scraped from
github.com. I doubt github has that many pages of non-user-generated content, so the question is… What data is going in there, who wrote it, and did anybody agree to that? What about other websites from those top domains, such asblogspot.com,wordpress.org,readthedocs.io? I doubt they got permission to use the 17175161 pages of content from blogspot they’ve scraped.
So yeah, maybe there’s a “good” model out there I’d actually accept, but I’ve seen “open” models being released, and I can’t possibly check all of them, just checking the websites for one of the sources for one of the models took 20 minutes here, if I wanted to verify this properly I’d have to setup the tooling to query the terabytes of data for this source, and all others, and even there I’m not sure if I’d find answers.
one of my specific issues is use of the word intelligence. exactly 0 of the “AI” built over the previous 60 years is “endowed with the faculty of understanding or reason”… it is false advertising at best and a scam if we’re being honest.
if they called it “bag of words” processing or “computer that is pretty good at guessing what your taking about” i’d be less irritated when people laud it’s accomplishments.
at the core, all of these technologies are signal processing and pattern recognition, nothing more… no matter what musk, altman and the rest say there is no intelligence in there.
You are just using a very narrow definition of intelligence to mean exactly human-like intelligence. All intelligence is signal processing and pattern recognition. You can give LLM a novel task and it might complete it. Sometimes even well. Sure, you may argue it doesn’t “understand” what’s it’s doing the way humans do (seemingly), but it’s still intelligence of some kind.
I’m using the definition of intelligence from a dictionary. language should be accurate. if AI folks called it “intellectual mimicry” I would have no issues.
they are attempting to bequeath an endowment based on specious reasoning and the hope to make money; not on the actual abilities of the machine.
People focus on the “intelligence” part but ignore artificial, and I think that makes a big difference. The name is pretty apt honestly. It appears to be intelligent. It outwardly simulates intelligence. But it’s all man made to present that illusion - like an artificial reef.
Artificial: made, produced, or done by humans especially to seem like something natural.
Sure, you may argue it doesn’t “understand” what’s it’s doing the way humans do (seemingly)
I think one could argue that “It doesn’t actually understand what it’s saying, it’s just parroting its training data” also applies to a depressingly large portion of the human population.
you just gave me some new slang! Instead of using AI to describe these technologies, I will use PP, for parrot processing. 🤣
“Stochastic parrot” is the term I see most often
As an autist, this is pretty much how I communicated with neurotypicals for most of my life. Person says something, I pull something out of my database of premade scripts and with any luck, it made sense in context. 😅😅
This is an issue of science in general, and MANY people take issue with naming conventions, even scientists themselves. Black holes aren’t black and they aren’t holes. The big bang didn’t explode and there probably wasn’t sound. The primordial soup didn’t have chicken broth.
Unfortunately, that is exceedingly unlikely to change.
People figured out how to make statistical inferences smart enough to write kinda like humans and do a bunch of other things really really well. We would ignore them at our own peril.
Accepting their output as a replacement for human art and expression is another matter entirely.
Careful. If you start being too reasonable people might accuse you of using ad hominems.
Fascists didnt invent AI, Gen AI or LLMs. They are just using them, selling and making money with it.
Same with cars. Fascists didnt invent the car or EVs. They are just using them, selling and making money with it.
But you wouldnt call someone out for driving with their car to a antifascist protest, would you?
Is it a Tesla?
I hope not, I just mentioned EVs because it makes the comparison more striking
So no using guns either. Got it.
Sometimes I think these are righties just trying to limit the left’s ability to push back.
PS the phone or pc you’re using alongside the internet service in 99% of cases originates from inhumane and ostensibly fascist origins that rape the lands, use major server farms (data centers), and exploit cheap labor, and advances oligarchies. Better brick them, right…?
It is such a liberal thing to take a byproduct of capitalist exploitation and turn it into its own political expression
I hate clankers as much as the next person, and providing money to war profiteering should obviously be avoided with great priority…
But really? This is a wild comparison on so many levels. There are ways to use AI ethically, and there are ways to use it unethically, amd blinding yourself to that conversation is willful ignorance.
Absolutely. I’ve softened my stance a lot recently. I think local llm are fine. The data has already been crunched the books destroyed and the water used so I may as well play with one locally. If you set realistic uses as a tool its fine. Need a quick script great at that. Summarize some notes, or search through them also great. Not really into image gen or anything else but anything helping me get dumb stuff out of the way for just myself its a W. I’m not down with using it for public facing stuff.
AI != LLM != LLM chatbots.
But in this case the use of “AI” means “LLM chatbots”, nobody is really making an argument against other kinds of AI, like what is used to detect cancer (there is an argument to be made about having a black box in a medical context, but this is not the place for it).
This should be obvious.
Using AI to detect cancer early? Using AI to help find new beneficial medications? Using AI to advance materials science? Great! Things like these are absolutely what we need more of.
Using AI to steal massive amounts of content made by non-consenting parties and regurgitate for AI corp profits? Using corporate algorithms to manipulate output to generate results favoring corporate billionaire owners economically and politically? Using it to make sexual photos of non-consenting women and underage girls? Using it to find ways to deny coverage, strip more money from people, wage war, attack intelligence and discourse, and remove accountability for corporate owners? Fuck that.
Guess which ones the oligarchs prefer.
Well said! It’s almost as if the conversation is being intentionally moved to ‘YES AI’ (sexy future times) vs 'NO AI (Luddite, dumb, regressive) instead of what every conversation is actually about, which is that morality should never be allowed to be determined by wealth.
Honestly I’d say it’s a pretty apt comparison. Pledging to defend your rights while avoiding using anything labeled “AI” because fascists use it is about as smart as pledging to defend your rights without using guns because fascists use them.
Thank you for saying what I was trying to much more concisely ❤️
Aren’t they taking a loss on every AI operation? Like a big loss. So use enough, especially free versions, and you will drive them to bankruptcy. Lol
If you use the free versions, you are still feeding them content to train their models.
Depends on what you send as a prompt. <evil grin>
Didn’t we say the same about Twitter being bought? Running it at a loss is okay for them as long as they use it to control the markets in other ways to make a profit.
They can just make more money to keep the bubble from popping. There is a limit to that but how much damage to the environment will they do before that point?
If by make more money, you mean get more investment capital from the wealthy… they can. And those people who have their money in these companies when the bubble bursts will lose a very large portion of it.
That yes but also the government will print money for a bailout like they did for the automotives and banks years ago. But they can only do that once or twice. Too big to fail is still the rule of law in american echo gnomics.
How? They’re running at a huge loss.
Anthropic’s last quarter posted a profit.
You’re right. Keep thinking that.
In a war where losing means living under fascism and imperialism, where we fight for freedom and our very right to exist, we need to consider every tool at our disposal—even those used by our oppressors.
When they are willing to rig elections, run disinformation campaigns, and use violence and terror tactics on their own citizens, we can’t afford to quibble over which tactics make us feel good. That’s what it means to fight for our lives.
“AI = fascist?” Come on, let’s not dilute the term “fascist” to mean “anything I don’t like.” THAT kind of thinking is the weapon of the enemy!
LLM chatbots are designed to isolate you from the people around you, from other people online and from actual sources of knowledge, making it harder to build people power and actual community.
It is pretty inherent to these chatbots too, as they are basically a replacement to search engine (which themselves were replacements to indeces), otherwise they don’t serve a real purpose, that is to say there is no well defined problem it is a solution too.
Guns and Muscles are fascist too! Fighting is fascist.
Guns were invented literally thousands of years before fascism
I think there was probably one or two people in power with fascistic tenancies a bit before guns. Pretty sure you wouldn’t have too much trouble finding a fascist in Mesopotamia. Anyone with a slave would qualify if you ask me. This whole thread and your arguments are pretty weak.
Llms are useful, and they can help people against fascism. Certainly they are not used that way predominantly today.
Looking forward to the downvotes. Till next time.
Firearms are barely a 1000 year old technology.
have you ever heard of the hyperbowl
I don’t think AI is anti-ethical or fascist per se. As many argued here, you can run it locally, you can train it on public data sets, etc.
But there is another problem that is hardly mentioned. Let’s call it a culturally negative feedback loop. AI is different from any other tool because it pretends to be an universal tool. It can generate music, pictures, videos, text, code. If we as a society outsource all those skills to automatisation, there’s a real danger we unlearn those skills.
