Unpopular Opinion
Welcome to the Unpopular Opinion community!
How voting works:
Vote the opposite of the norm.
If you agree that the opinion is unpopular give it an arrow up. If it's something that's widely accepted, give it an arrow down.
Guidelines:
Tag your post, if possible (not required)
- If your post is a "General" unpopular opinion, start the subject with [GENERAL].
- If it is a Lemmy-specific unpopular opinion, start it with [LEMMY].
Rules:
1. NO POLITICS
Politics is everywhere. Let's make this about [general] and [lemmy] - specific topics, and keep politics out of it.
2. Be civil.
Disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally attack others. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Please also refrain from gatekeeping others' opinions.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Shitposts and memes are allowed but...
Only until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.
5. No trolling.
This shouldn't need an explanation. If your post or comment is made just to get a rise with no real value, it will be removed. You do this too often, you will get a vacation to touch grass, away from this community for 1 or more days. Repeat offenses will result in a perma-ban.
Instance-wide rules always apply. https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/
view the rest of the comments
There is a paradox here, as there are 2 possibilities either
A) AI generated "slop" is obviously bad quality, theirfor a label is unnecessary as it is obvious.
Or
B) the AI generated content looks as good as human creations therfore is not slop and a label is unnecessary.
If someone makes an ai clip of a politician saying something they didn't should we believe it cause the ai was convincing enough?
Really photoshopped images meant to seem as real as possible should be flagged. It sounds ridiculous just because it has become the norm to accept them.
Relevant xkcd
It is absolutely critical that the capabilities are broadly adopted because in the future, the difference will be indiscernible.
This is absolutely a lose lose nuclear proliferation-like situation and cannot be avoided. If the technology is unknown to the general populous it holds great power over them. There are more nuanced uses of this new toolset than anyone has yet realized. One could respond to populous media and digital social misalignment in complex ways that none of us can see or filter. The tool use is not a simple polar dichotomy. One could use a tool to monitor social sentiment and respond in ways to steer the conversation using one's own likeness and social presence at any instance of qualia from a corporate account, to think tank, or political figure.Those of us with the time and ability to explore such things should be welcomed and listened to carefully. Most people in this space are not the assholes you are angry or frustrated with. I don't give a @#$% about tricking anyone or replacing anything. I only care about what I am curious about and learning new things to occupy my time in social isolation from physical disability. I could share a lot more, but when people act stupid, I do not share much at all. I'm capable of independence in exploring unique paths and applications. The more grounded I am from engaging with others the more effective I am at doing useful things and sharing them. I'm not some savant genius type at all. I'm a persistent rogue that explores off the beaten path in empirically useful but often unexpected ways. It is very easy to misunderstand the context of things I talk about and might share. I am often wrong about several assumptions and details, but if one takes the time to look into my results, the empirical patterns that ground what I am saying will emerge and those nuggets are often useful. This is the real, messy edge of amateur and hobby culture. When I encounter negative prejudice, I'm not going to endure the stupidity of those that fail to contextualize and see the value of my abstractions through the haze of my explorations. I just want to share something I find interesting or useful as I understand it in my contiguously moving target of learning. Anyone that responds to that kind of post or comment negatively, as if a person's knowledge is some kind of static state is beyond useless and stupid to me. I do not care about egos and narcissism. I do not care about oversimplified idealism of right or wrong. I care about curiosity and empirical usefulness because we live in the universe of irrational numbers where booleans and integers do not exist except in fantasies of the mind and the limited registers of computational machines that are always wrong in their truncation of reality.
It is just a tool. Some are sour because evolution dictates they must be. The culture of artificial scarcity and unnecessary pressure produces and rewards assholes. It is this culture that is the problem, not the tool. We live in a dystopia that is reigned by assholes. Sam Altmann is the asshole funding the culture of blaming this new tool. Monopoly in this space can be used to exploit the status quo for more profit. This exploitation only works in a monopoly where the tool is proprietary. In the real world with an open source tool, the time it saves opens up great wealth to the average person and business. Our culture can expand by reinvesting our newly acquired wealth. This is the intelligent use of the new tool. Those that can only see the present as some kind of final state to extract value are idiotic parasites of humanity. We can become something more like has occurred for thousands of years of human innovation. These proprietary parasites of humanity are twisting reality to subject us to their vampirism of extracted wealth and subjugation. I reject this narrative and stupidity because I can clearly see the big picture. I wish y'all would disconnect, set back, and see the big picture too. Nothing about AI tools is a negative unless you fall in line with Altmann's dystopian vision.
A) Some people are really really bad at noticing AI slop. I’ve seen some really obvious AI generated images with people debating if it’s real or not. Unless those comments were AI and I’m the one who can’t tell…
B) Honestly even good AI generated content should come with a disclaimer IMO.
*therefore
Even if it looks good, it's slop.