All of which should be done by human beings. Period.

Currently, maybe. But technology is fantastic at accuracy, better than humans in many regards. Gemini might have a way to go before it gets there, but it or its successors will get there and it’s moving fast.

Productivity is irrelevant here

I’m not sure it is. Productivity also refers to efficiency of services. If AI can make the services of the National Archives more productive for its staff and/or the public then surely that’s a good thing?

🎵 Tesla Optimus! Humans in disguise! 🎵

Second recommendation for Affinity Photo as a Photoshop replacement. 👍

Oh for sure. How we regulate AI (including how we power it) is really important, definitely.

Typical lack of nuance on the Internet, sadly. Everything has to be Bad or Good. Black or White. AI is either The best thing ever™ or The worst thing ever™. No room for anything in between. Considering negative news generates more clicks, you can see why the media tend to take the latter approach.

I also think much of the hate is just people jumping on the AI = bad band-wagon. Does it have issues? Absolutely. Is it perfect? Far from it. But the constant negativity has gotten tired. There’s a lot of fascinating discussion to be had around AI, especially in the art world, but God forbid you suggest it’s anything but responsible for the total collapse of civilisation as we know it…

I felt a great disturbance in the force, as if millions of bank accounts suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly emptied.

Fascinating article!

This is for EU countries only. UK details here: https://www.stopkillinggames.com/countries/united_kingdom for anyone interested.

Man, Brink had so much promise…

Maybe, but we can certainly help by, amongst many other things, not advertising AI Nude Apps on Instagram. Ultimately what we shouldn’t be doing is blaming the victims by implying they are somehow at fault for having the audacity to upload pictures of themselves to the Internet.

It’s about consent. If you have no problem with people jerking off to your pictures, fine, but others do.

If you don’t want people to jerk off to your photos, don’t upload any. It happens with and without these apps.

You get that that opinion is pretty much the same as those who say if she didn’t want to be harrassed she shouldn’t have worn such provocative clothing!?

How about we allow people to upload whatever pictures they want and try to address the weirdos turning them into porn without consent, rather than blaming the victims?

Excellent news.

I’d rather ‘little contribution’ than none at all. I’d rather ‘every couple of clicks’ than none at all. It’s not perfect, but it’s better than the major alternatives.

Agreed! :) I’m not sure where you are in the world but, if you can, you might be interested in this:

https://www.channel4.com/programmes/chris-packham-is-it-time-to-break-the-law

Then I think we’re talking at cross purposes. Believe me, I understand the scale of the task and I understand that performative action can be just as damaging as doing nothing at all. However my point is that by only and exclusively focusing on the negative you risk giving the impression that any action is pointless. Those people that you mention chaining themselves to trees etc do so because they believe that it is the only way to achieve the change that is required, but they do believe that change is possible, otherwise why bother? Marinate those same people in a exclusive culture of “we’re all doomed, change is pointless because it’s too late and it’s naive to think otherwise” and soon enough you won’t have anyone chaining themselves to anything because you’ve managed to convince them, wrongly, that it’s a waste of time.

There’s a psychological aspect to fighting climate change that I think people forget. You need motivation and determination and I belive you get that by staying informed of both the bad and the good work that is being done. Celebrating the little wins so we can continue to push for the big ones. I hope that makes my point a bit clearer? Maybe these articles will do a better job of explaining what I mean, lol:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jul/26/we-cant-afford-to-be-climate-doomers

https://grist.org/climate-energy/hope-and-fellowship/

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/du jour

No one said anything about mindless optimism. You are correct, change is needed and fast, but relentless pessimism achieves nothing except foster defeat. I’m advocating for a realistic approach to how we look at climate change mitigation. Part of being realistic is understanding that things may not be as hopeless as parts of the Internet would like you to believe.

Countries already are. Slower than we’d like, but change is happening. Big changes start small, but gain momentum. Look at the rollout of renewables and EVs. If you’d described where we are now to past me only 10 years ago, I wouldn’t have believed you.

The amount of Doomers on Lemmy and Reddit is depressingly large as well. It’s du jour to act like any talk of climate positivity is naive, change is impossible and collapse is inevitable. Just look at the popularity of whole subs dedicated to Collapse and Doomer material. It’s exhausting trying to challenge the position of some of these users, yet we must try. Hope is an important part of tackling the climate challenges we’re facing, and the glamorisation of defeatism isn’t going to help foster that.