ai

[orange-waffle]

anyone else scared of ai in the future? its so dangerous with deepfakes and nudes

 

[Agon321]

Yes and no.

It is worth adding that we do not currently have "real" AI.
We use this word for simplicity and marketing.
Of course, I also use this word for simplicity.

AI is a huge threat that people are not ready for.
It's already easy to cheat people on the Internet.
With developed AI it will become much easier.
People unfamiliar with the technology will be pathetically easy targets.
Of course, everyone will be exposed to threats.
AI is attacking and will continue to attack every element of life.
Currently, the laws in countries around the world and human brains are not ready for this.
We are facing a huge cognitive dissonance.
People losing their jobs is another matter

However, I am very excited about the possibilities of AI.
We can look forward to growth on an unprecedented scale.
AI can compensate for our intellectual blocks.
Do things we can't do.

Self-aware AI is a completely different story.
Our species has dominated this planet through abstract thinking, intelligence, and perhaps physical endurance.
What will happen if there is a species more intelligent than us?
For example, I don't take a dog to help me. AI might think the same.
It all depends on what it will look like.
It's hard for me to say.
Most likely, people working in AI have some security policies.
I hope that new rules will be created and followed.

I don't have the knowledge to say what the future will look like.
Maybe an exciting future awaits us? Or maybe a complete dystopia.
We must also remember that our species is corrupt and, in many cases, selfish.
This is an explosive mixture.
Politicians and great people of this world will want to use AI.
My pessimistic thinking tells me that ordinary people will not benefit from this

If a disaster awaits us, it will be a beautiful disaster.
However, I believe that you should not be afraid in advance.
What will be, it will be :).

 

[dragonofenvy]

Deepfakes have been a thing for a while. One prominent example was in the film "The Crow" where the main actor died on set before they could finish the film, so they deepfaked his face onto certain scenes and used clever camera angles to disguise that it was fake. I'm not very concerned about deepfakes. I am concerned about using AI for research instead of doing it yourself. I think it's a good tool to start with, but it should be used in addition instead of alone. I also don't like how they're using AI to filter out job candidates making it hard for people to get jobs now. I'm concerned that eventually, we'll use AI to "assist" people with voting or other things. Some people think a technocracy would be great but I certainly don't. It's a great tool, but shouldn't be given too much power. Overall I'm not too concerned. Most likely by the time it becomes a big problem I'll be gone or it'll be the next century.

 

[SuicidalOrganism]

ai is pure garbage according to my experience. if it "replaces" us then it wont have any new data to feed itself, thus creating an internetsphere full of the same recycled stuff it creates

 

[EvisceratedJester]

I feel like AI should only be reserved for things, like research, rather than allowing it to be available for the public to use. There are way too many ethical issues connected to it.

 

[whywere]

AI is like the atom bomb in 1945 and so many other "advancements" in human history. By a higher power or something, we stumble and bumble along and if it seems as we might go too far and do something very stupid and have our species fade away, something steps in, maybe at the last moment, and makes us step back.

AI might help, might not, only the future will tell and hopefully not influenced by greedy, power-hungry morons.

Walter

 

[sserafim]

I think that AI is a danger to humanity and society. I think that the world will never be the same once AI takes off and gets implemented. I think there will be mass unemployment and layoffs once AI takes all of the jobs. I don't understand why more people aren't scared of AI. AI is a threat and will probably cause massive, unprecedented societal change. There will probably be an AI dystopia and our world will become dystopian. The governments and elites aren't altruistic enough to implement a system of UBI. People will probably end up starving and homeless on the streets once their jobs get taken over. Society will have no need for people (human capital/resources) anymore. Why hire a human if you can get AI to do the job in a fraction of the time and at no cost? I wonder if governments will finally allow euthanasia for all though

ai is pure garbage according to my experience. if it "replaces" us then it wont have any new data to feed itself, thus creating an internetsphere full of the same recycled stuff it creates

Wdym

 

[SuicidalOrganism]

Wdym

generative ai is built with stolen artwork/data. if there will be no sufficient data then it cant generate something new or out of its bounds

 

[derpyderpins]

I feel like AI should only be reserved for things, like research, rather than allowing it to be available for the public to use. There are way too many ethical issues connected to it.

I understand this, but very muchso disagree. Who will be in charge of choosing who gets access to it? I'm from the US, and certainly don't trust literally any of our government officials to make those determinations. AI would be used to expand the patriot act x10000, make weapons, and nothing else. How will you stop people from creating and using open source applications? Jail time? Constant monitoring of everyone's online presence? Because in that case, say goodbye to this forum. What about offline uses? How will you stop countries that don't give af and will use ai to its fullest potential anyway?

I also generally dislike the idea of limiting the use of a potentially excellent tool because of perceived dangers. We already work way too much, and haven't gotten any relief from technology advances in the past 50+ years. AI could make a lot of things easier. I won't accept some politician telling me I can't use it because I'M too dangerous.

People will use it, and trying to forbid it will only give the people who are better at circumventing the rules more of an advantage while oppressing normal people. Society is fucked for a dozen+ reasons, ai would just be one more.

generative ai is built with stolen artwork/data. if there will be no sufficient data then it cant generate something new or out of its bounds

Besides arguing the phrase "stolen", when all art is in some way derivative of all past art, that argument may only hold up so long. It's advancing rapidly and may be able to determine what factors make novel concepts appealing. Plus, at some point it will have a large enough body of it's own - even if "stolen" - art for its own use and won't need new human-made art unless it's going to be a groundbreaking masterpiece.

 

[EvisceratedJester]

I understand this, but very muchso disagree. Who will be in charge of choosing who gets access to it? I'm from the US, and certainly don't trust literally any of our government officials to make those determinations. AI would be used to expand the patriot act x10000, make weapons, and nothing else. How will you stop people from creating and using open source applications? Jail time? Constant monitoring of everyone's online presence? Because in that case, say goodbye to this forum. What about offline uses? How will you stop countries that don't give af and will use ai to its fullest potential anyway?

I also generally dislike the idea of limiting the use of a potentially excellent tool because of perceived dangers. We already work way too much, and haven't gotten any relief from technology advances in the past 50+ years. AI could make a lot of things easier. I won't accept some politician telling me I can't use it because I'M too dangerous.

People will use it, and trying to forbid it will only give the people who are better at circumventing the rules more of an advantage while oppressing normal people. Society is fucked for a dozen+ reasons, ai would just be one more.

Do you think your government isn't already going to do all those things, with or without AI being regulated? Making AI regulated wouldn't make much of difference when it comes to governments misusing it. Also, AI has the potential to put many people out of jobs, so the whole "make things easier" falls apart too. Plus, you are completely ignoring all the harm it has already caused, with there already being cases of people using AI to create fake nudes of people and spread them around. Did you ignore the whole Taylor Swift fiasco?

 

[Malaria]

Due to my "return to monke" ideology, I am afraid of a lot of technology, and AI is no different. I acknowledge it can do good things, and technology itself is often neutral... it's more how it's being used rather than the tech itself... but yeah, I have a lot of fear of AI and automation in general. I hope those fears don't come true.

 

[4am]

I understand this, but very muchso disagree. Who will be in charge of choosing who gets access to it? I'm from the US, and certainly don't trust literally any of our government officials to make those determinations. AI would be used to expand the patriot act x10000, make weapons, and nothing else. How will you stop people from creating and using open source applications? Jail time? Constant monitoring of everyone's online presence? Because in that case, say goodbye to this forum. What about offline uses? How will you stop countries that don't give af and will use ai to its fullest potential anyway?

israel is already using ai to help them bomb palestinians

Due to my "return to monke" ideology, I am afraid of a lot of technology, and AI is no different. I acknowledge it can do good things, and technology itself is often neutral... it's more how it's being used rather than the tech itself... but yeah, I have a lot of fear of AI and automation in general. I hope those fears don't come true.

are you anprim?

 

[Malaria]

are you anprim?

I'm not really sure how to label myself tbh.

 

[derpyderpins]

Do you think your government isn't already going to do all those things, with or without AI being regulated? Making AI regulated wouldn't make much of difference when it comes to governments misusing it.

Yup. They will. My point wasn't that they could be stopped, just that what they will use it for is stupid.

Also, AI has the potential to put many people out of jobs, so the whole "make things easier" falls apart too.

. . . So you operate under the belief that the government is capable of effectively regulating things, right? And in the situation where I could use AI to do my job in one tenth the time, and my boss wants to fire me and replace me with ai, your solution is to just tell everyone they can't use it? That's wild to me. How about just telling the business they can't fire people or pay them less based on availability of ai? Again, it's no skin off my back, because I will find a way around regulations, but not everyone will.

Plus, you are completely ignoring all the harm it has already caused, with there already being cases of people using AI to create fake nudes of people and spread them around. Did you ignore the whole Taylor Swift fiasco?

I understand people posted fake nude pictures of Taylor Swift online. It wasn't actually Taylor Swift, but it looked like her. Posting that shit is vile. It's also not unique. People have been putting celebrities faces on nude bodies since microsoft paint first came out. Now, most of them are garbage and look fake, so I guess that's the difference, right? Well, what if someone made those same pictures with good photoshop skills? Is the difference just that AI makes it easier? If so, that's an unconvincing rationalization. If you have a problem with people posting fake pictures of celebrities, the tool is not the problem.

Unfortunately, it's a reality people will have to learn to live with; fake pictures and videos will keep coming up. Making them crimes will be an excuse for selective enforcement and persecution. This technology is going to happen. Banning it won't stop it. I don't know who else has "already" been harmed by ai. I know artists are upset because something 99% as good as what they make can be spit out in 5 seconds, and I sympathize, but it's not like we banned digital art to satisfy purists who insist on a physical brush. As a casual musician, it is discouraging when I listen to these new ai tools developing, but I'm trying to focus on (1) how I can use them, and (2) how I can separate myself from what they make. Again, because it's inevitable.

 

[EvisceratedJester]

Yup. They will. My point wasn't that they could be stopped, just that what they will use it for is stupid.



. . . So you operate under the belief that the government is capable of effectively regulating things, right? And in the situation where I could use AI to do my job in one tenth the time, and my boss wants to fire me and replace me with ai, your solution is to just tell everyone they can't use it? That's wild to me. How about just telling the business they can't fire people or pay them less based on availability of ai? Again, it's no skin off my back, because I will find a way around regulations, but not everyone will.



I understand people posted fake nude pictures of Taylor Swift online. It wasn't actually Taylor Swift, but it looked like her. Posting that shit is vile. It's also not unique. People have been putting celebrities faces on nude bodies since microsoft paint first came out. Now, most of them are garbage and look fake, so I guess that's the difference, right? Well, what if someone made those same pictures with good photoshop skills? Is the difference just that AI makes it easier? If so, that's an unconvincing rationalization. If you have a problem with people posting fake pictures of celebrities, the tool is not the problem.

Unfortunately, it's a reality people will have to learn to live with; fake pictures and videos will keep coming up. Making them crimes will be an excuse for selective enforcement and persecution. This technology is going to happen. Banning it won't stop it. I don't know who else has "already" been harmed by ai. I know artists are upset because something 99% as good as what they make can be spit out in 5 seconds, and I sympathize, but it's not like we banned digital art to satisfy purists who insist on a physical brush. As a casual musician, it is discouraging when I listen to these new ai tools developing, but I'm trying to focus on (1) how I can use them, and (2) how I can separate myself from what they make. Again, because it's inevitable.

First off, why mention the government misusing AI if it has nothing to do with it being regulated?

Secondly, the point is, people are already using AI for bad purposes. AI make its it significantly more easy for people to create things, like revenage porn. Photoshop takes skills, but AI can allow you to create just about anything in a very short period of time. The lack of regulation around it allows just about anyone to use it for nefarious purposes.

Thirdly, the fact that your argument to people losing their livelihoods because of AI is talk abiut how you plan on using it as a tool is dumb. Using it as a tool doesn't matter when it's going to end up causing people to lose their jobs. Most of the people using it and profiting off of it aren't using it as tools. There is no "separating yourself" from anything when your competing against a hoard of AI generated bullshit. Your also ignoring the potential larger issue, with companies potentially using it in the future to cut costs, leading to people getting laid off.

It's better that governments at least attempt to try and regulate AI instead of allow it to run free and wild.

 

[derpyderpins]

First off, why mention the government misusing AI if it has nothing to do with it being regulated?

I like complaining about my government. It was an off-hand comment.

Secondly, the point is, people are already using AI for bad purposes. AI make its it significantly more easy for people to create things, like revenage porn. Photoshop takes skills, but AI can allow you to create just about anything in a very short period of time. The lack of regulation around it allows just about anyone to use it for nefarious purposes.

Okay, so it is because it makes it easier. You don't want to get rid of photoshop, you just want to set a limit on how good and user-friendly photoshop can get using ai so it remains frustrating with a high barrier to entry.

Thirdly, the fact that your argument to people losing their livelihoods because of AI is talk abiut how you plan on using it as a tool is dumb. Using it as a tool doesn't matter when it's going to end up causing people to lose their jobs. Most of the people using it and profiting off of it aren't using it as tools.

I still don't understand why you would "regulate" ai by not letting regular people use it rather than not letting businesses replace people with it. Didn't really answer that.

There is no "separating yourself" from anything when your competing against a hoard of AI generated bullshit.

Eventually, maybe. I'm no visual art expert. In music, ai is starting to spit out well produced tracks, but it's not going to write bohemian rhapsody. I do think it will someday, but for now, musicians can dig deeper and make something superior. If artists can't make something better than the computer . . . that sucks, but it's no reason to get rid of the tool. We didn't tell Henry Ford to pound sand because he was going to put stagecoaches out of business.

Your also ignoring the potential larger issue, with companies potentially using it in the future to cut costs, leading to people getting laid off.

I didn't ignore it. I specifically said go ahead and regulate how companies use it, not individual people, in an attempt to meet in the middle. Also, we as a society need to stop working so much, and it's time for a change. If it requires ai laying people off for the population to revolt and change how things work, I think that was eventually coming anyway.

It's better that governments at least attempt to try and regulate AI instead of allow it to run free and wild.

Agree to disagree.