In reply to a developer on one of the Linux kernel mailing lists, Linux creator Linus Torvalds firmly put a foot down to push back against anti-AI comments.
As for productivity losses and environmental destruction, that’s sort of what I was referring to when I said “bonus points for cheaper and faster development”. The environmental destruction refers to energy usage. Productivity can be thought of as time usage. If AI can be cheaper than humans in both time and energy, then that’s a win.
There’s a related discussion about how the context here is mainly about finding vulnerabilies with AI. And that is one where AI does seem to be faster and cheaper than using humans. Since AI is now finding kernel vulnerabilities that have been lurking there for 15+ years.
Maybe code generation will get there too.
As an artist you might also be worried about how AI is trained on copyrighted data. But I personally don’t really care about copyright
While I am very anti-genAI, I’m much more okay with analytical AI as long as it’s not blindly trusted. Technically they don’t need an LLM as they could use something smaller and optimized just to find vulnerabilities. I still take issue with ethical and environmental concerns but I think there are solutions to them. We just need to slow down, take the time to do things right, and ditch the whole “move fast and break things” mindset commonly seen in tech, but I doubt that will ever happen.
My viewpoint is that genAI will always cause cognitive decline no matter what however I haven’t come across any studies yet about analytical AI also brain rotting people. If it’s trained on data with consent from it’s owners’ and they find a solution to the environmental problems, I’d be fine with it as long as it’s used for good purposes.
This post about AI detecting cancer makes me believe it might be genuinely useful, although of course it can be used for despicable, evil purposes as well.
Also, humans really like making/designing things. I don’t see the point in automating activities that many people love doing. Every time I come across an ad advertising image gen or whatever it just feels so out of touch with humanity.
Fair. I think if somebody gets brainrot from using AI that’s their own problem, just like a programmer losing their coding skills after become a product manager. I don’t see how that makes AI bad.
I don’t see the point in automating activities that many people love doing.
Some people like the process, some people like the product. For those who only care about the product, why not let them use AI? Doesn’t stop you from enjoying the process.
I admit that this is getting pretty far from the original discussion though so no worries if you’d rather end it here. I just have fun thinking about these things
As for productivity losses and environmental destruction, that’s sort of what I was referring to when I said “bonus points for cheaper and faster development”. The environmental destruction refers to energy usage. Productivity can be thought of as time usage. If AI can be cheaper than humans in both time and energy, then that’s a win.
There’s a related discussion about how the context here is mainly about finding vulnerabilies with AI. And that is one where AI does seem to be faster and cheaper than using humans. Since AI is now finding kernel vulnerabilities that have been lurking there for 15+ years.
Maybe code generation will get there too.
As an artist you might also be worried about how AI is trained on copyrighted data. But I personally don’t really care about copyright
While I am very anti-genAI, I’m much more okay with analytical AI as long as it’s not blindly trusted. Technically they don’t need an LLM as they could use something smaller and optimized just to find vulnerabilities. I still take issue with ethical and environmental concerns but I think there are solutions to them. We just need to slow down, take the time to do things right, and ditch the whole “move fast and break things” mindset commonly seen in tech, but I doubt that will ever happen.
What’s your argument against generative AI but not analytical AI? From what I’ve seen the arguments for/against one also work for the other
My viewpoint is that genAI will always cause cognitive decline no matter what however I haven’t come across any studies yet about analytical AI also brain rotting people. If it’s trained on data with consent from it’s owners’ and they find a solution to the environmental problems, I’d be fine with it as long as it’s used for good purposes.
This post about AI detecting cancer makes me believe it might be genuinely useful, although of course it can be used for despicable, evil purposes as well.
Also, humans really like making/designing things. I don’t see the point in automating activities that many people love doing. Every time I come across an ad advertising image gen or whatever it just feels so out of touch with humanity.
Fair. I think if somebody gets brainrot from using AI that’s their own problem, just like a programmer losing their coding skills after become a product manager. I don’t see how that makes AI bad.
Some people like the process, some people like the product. For those who only care about the product, why not let them use AI? Doesn’t stop you from enjoying the process.
I admit that this is getting pretty far from the original discussion though so no worries if you’d rather end it here. I just have fun thinking about these things