you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 10 points 12 hours ago (9 children)

Comrade, this is a reactionary viewpoint. Marxism is not a moral philosophy. Arguments against capitalism are not based on the idea that private property or certain tools are "morally impure."

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (8 children)

    I'm not arguing from some standpoint of AI slop being "morally impure".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 11 hours ago (7 children)

    Then what is inherently wrong with slop for a meme? There's plenty to criticize from a materialist standpoint, but it's important that we maintain that standpoint.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 11 hours ago* (6 children)

    I think this usage of gen AI is bad because it produces pure slop and further normalises gen AI slop even in leftist circles. I think AI-slop is bad due to the resources required to produce it as well as it helping advance the legitimisation of gen-AI "art", which alleviates pressure on large companies to avoid it, which then leads to them using gen AI slop instead of something produced by artists.
    I think "slop" for memes are bad because memes have potential to be more than mere brainrot, but since the medium is part of the message and the medium of AI-slop sends a message that the contents are so unserious the creator could not even be bothered to do the bare minimum of work, then the content can be dismissed immediately - It makes for bad agitprop.

    I am not against all AI all the time. I am against frivolous usage of something that fucks up the climate, requires the construction of massive data centres - especially during a time where all resources ought to be directed towards climate change - and I think we have to be mindful of how automation fucks up the job market, while we live in a world where it is a bad thing when people have to do less work.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 11 hours ago (5 children)

    So, if someone generates an image on their laptop using solar power, using locally run hardware, is it still inherently wrong? What is the advantage to artisinally fashioning a meme with the same message, when memes are inherently a low-effort, mass-produced form of social expression?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (4 children)

    So, if someone generates an image on their laptop using solar power, using locally run hardware, is it still inherently wrong?

    It is not inherently wrong. In your use case I would have less issue with it.

    What is the advantage to artisinally fashioning a meme with the same message, when memes are inherently a low-effort, mass-produced form of social expression?

    I do not mean to be rude, but I struggle to see how I did not answer this with the "the medium is part of the message" part.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 hours ago (3 children)

    I'm trying to get you to formulate a more materialist answer to opposing AI. The AI question isn't really settled in Marxism yet, but it's essentially a tool.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 hours ago (2 children)

    Cowbee, im sorry, but as you yourself say this isn't a settled question at all. There is some common ground we can agree on, but after that there's many different assertions one can make, all with decent reasoning behind. Those assertions can then be related to in a few reasonable ways as well.
    What we can agree on is that most gen-ai right now is not made with locally run models using renewable energy and the data used to train those models does come from massive data centers. There are people using locally run models and there's probably someone doing something renewable and there's some who have their own smaller models that dont rely on data centres, but they are quite far from being the norm.

    So unless otherwise stated I assume it is an average user of an average gen-ai.
    Then the other assertion is that people find it easier to dismiss AI-slop - easier even than some meme, which means AI slop makes for poor agitprop. At this point there is plenty to be pointed towards going for and against this assertion, so its not settled in any real way. As such, I doubt we are able to come to a consensus at the moment.
    Another assertion is the one I made about normalisation. If there is anything that can be solved thru discussion at the moment it might be that, but honestly it isn't the big reason im against it, since normalisation is only bad under current circumstances in my eyes.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 hour ago (1 child)

    I don't think normalization is a problem so much as justifying the capitalist nature of it. We can see the difference between how AI is handled in, say, China, vs. how it's handled under capitalism, so it's important to actually attack the role AI plays in capitalism, rather than AI itself. The problem is the social relation, not the tool.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment