|
|
|
|
|
|
by jayrot
872 days ago
|
|
|
May I just say, as a third-party simply reading this back and forth from the outside, that the tone of your writing and the implied attitude with which you are engaging in "debate", reads as very aggressive and uninterested in actually having a sincere discussion. To me at least. I imagine you probably won't like this comment, but perhaps you might use it as an opportunity for reflection and self-awareness. If your interest is actually to potentially change someone's mind, and not just "be right", you might consider approaching it in a different way so that your tone doesn't get in the way of the substance of arguments you wish to make. Just a suggestion. Take care. |
|
|
Nevertheless I'm always open to be persuaded by actual arguments, and I have on numerous issues, but I have yet to see any convincing refutations on these points I've outlined here regarding primarily, but not limited to:
- The unethical sourcing of training data
- The exploitation of lesser-privileged workers in managing it
- The harm being done and the harm that will be done to various professions if they become standard
And not mentioned in this thread:
- These various firms' superposition between potentially profitable business and "research initiatives," depending if they're trying to get investment or abuse the public square respectively
- The exploitative/disgusting/disinformative things these AI's are being used to produce to a society already saturated with false information and faked imagery
But these discussions usually dead end, like I said, when the other person stops answering or invokes the "well if we don't build it someone will" which is also unpersuasive.
Relating specifically to your point about wanting to change someones mind: in my first comment I do feel I put out an olive branch with empathy for being excited about a new thing. But when the new thing in question is so saturated from beginning to end in questionable ethics... I'm sorry there's only so much empathy I can extend. If you (not you specifically, but you as the theoretical person) are the kind of person ready to associate with this technology at this stage, when it's foibles and highly dubious origins are so well known, then I'm not overly interested in assuaging your feelings. This person came into this thread bemoaning the fact that so many people are calling them out on this and they're sick of it, and like, there's a great way to stop that happening: stop using the damn technology.
I will always extend empathy, but if your position is whining about people rightfully, IMO, pointing out that you are using unethical tech and you wish they'd stop? Like, sorry not sorry man, maybe you shouldn't use it then. Then you get less yelled at and a clear conscience. Win/win.
But I do appreciate the reply all the same, to be clear. You aren't wrong. I've just had this argument too much, but also don't feel I can really stop.