this post was submitted on 16 Aug 2024
334 points (100.0% liked)

TechTakes

1398 readers
119 users here now

Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.

This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.

For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

think I forgot this one

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] BlueMonday1984@awful.systems 78 points 3 months ago (6 children)

I've already seen people go absolutely fucking crazy with this - from people posting trans-supportive Muskrat pictures to people making fucked-up images with Nintendo/Disney characters, the utter lack of guardrails has led to predictable chaos.

Between the cost of running an LLM and the potential lawsuits this can unleash, part of me suspects this might end up being what ultimately does in Twitter.

[–] dgerard@awful.systems 23 points 3 months ago

lotta this is being used for blatantly political speech, really DIY editorial cartoons, e.g. the image we used

its eagerness to give you a school shooting, not so much

[–] rxin@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Court ruled AI output is public domain, is so AI mickey? lol

[–] BlueMonday1984@awful.systems 12 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It hasn't been hashed out in court yet, but I suspect AI mickey will be considered copyright infringement, rather than public domain.

[–] rxin@lemmy.blahaj.zone 14 points 3 months ago (1 children)

In typical fashion, copyright becomes stronger every time it loses grip on the mouse

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] probableprotogen@lemmy.dbzer0.com 48 points 3 months ago (3 children)

I really wish we would stop calling shitty tech products (such as this) the invention of billionares like Elon Musk. He probably did jackshit during the development of this.

[–] gerikson@awful.systems 25 points 3 months ago

Musk is probably unique among Big Tech owners in that he's using his product daily (most people think to the detriment of both Xshitter and his other ventures). He is definitely the person who both directed company resources to be devoted to a GenAI product, and ensured that it doesn't have the "guardrails" his fans and himself decry as "woke".

In other words, no other Big Tech CEO is dumb enough to give the OK to a product that trashes its reputation.

[–] BruceTwarzen@lemm.ee 16 points 3 months ago

Elon musks underpaid some people to release _____

[–] gerbler@lemmy.world 15 points 3 months ago (2 children)

It's using Flux which was developed by Black Forest Labs and is open source. Neither Elon nor twitter had any hand in its creation and simply use it on their site.

[–] smokebuddy@lemmy.today 10 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

grok was also found to just be chat gpt with instructions to be 'not woke' and 'funny'

i doubt x ai really does anything but they're treated like an actual ai player for some reason

[–] dgerard@awful.systems 8 points 3 months ago

oh really? someone said it was an API call to somewhere else

[–] UnseriousAcademic@awful.systems 37 points 3 months ago (12 children)

I feel like generative AI is an indicator of a broader pattern of innovation in stagnation (shower thoughts here, I'm not bringing sources to this game).

I was just a little while ago wondering if there is an argument to be made that the innovations of the post-war period were far more radically and beneficially transformative to most people. Stuff like accessible dishwashers, home tools, better home refrigeration etc. I feel like now tech is just here to make things worse. I can't think of any upcoming or recent home tech product that I'm remotely excited about.

[–] Moah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 19 points 3 months ago

A lot of the tech "innovation" is actually VC "innovation" and is meant to dismantle the safety nets of the working class. Literally half of their disruption is "we'll finance you to lose money until you've ruined all competition, and then you can price gouge everyone while your "contractors" don't get a decent salary, a retirement fund or any kind of insurance.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 16 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Most of the stuff these days is behind the scenes, like clean energy, innovative water reclamation, etc. it's life changing but we don't really see it every day.

In my opinion we should put cars away in urban areas and go to e-bikes/rickshaws. That would be both transformative and an improvement.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] YourNetworkIsHaunted@awful.systems 12 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I think there's definitely something to be said for the exhaustion of low-hanging fruit. Most of those big consumer innovations were either the application of novel physics or chemistry (refrigerants, synthetics, plastics, microwaves, etc) combined with automating very labor-intensive but relatively simple tasks (dish washing, laundry, manual screwdriving, etc). The digital age added some very powerful logic to that toolset, but still remains primarily limited to the kinds of activities and processes that can be defined algorithmically. The ingenuity of software developers along with the introduction of new tools and peripheral capabilities (printers, networks, sensors) have shown that the kind of problems that can be defined algorithmically is a much larger set than you would first think, but it's still limited.

Adding on to this, it's worth noting the degree to which defining problems algorithmically requires altering the parameters of that problem. For example, compare shopping at a store with using a vending machine. The vending machine dramatically changes the scope of the activity by limiting the variety of items you can get, only allowing one item per transaction, preventing you from examining the goods before purchasing, and so on. The high-level process is the same; I move from having no soda and some dollars to one soda and less dollars. But the changes that are made to ensure the procedure can be mechanized have some significant social tradeoffs. Each transaction has less friction, but also less potential. These consequences are even more pronounced if your point of comparison is an old-school sofa fountain where "hanging out waiting for the soda jerk and drinking together" is largely the whole point and while that activity requires more from you it also gives more opportunities to interact with and meet people and to see friends outside of work or school. Even if you don't want to spend the time or be social (or even like me get severe social anxiety sometimes!) this still leads to a world where there are more and larger blocks of time that you can't be expected to trade away to your job or other obligations. Your boss is likely to fire you for being late to work, unless that tardiness comes from the ferry you and your coworkers rely on being late. Because it's inevitable friction in a necessary part of working (can't work if you can't get to work) and because it can't be put entirely on the individual (even if you do want to blame the employee for taking the "wrong* boat so you really want to fire the whole team?) the system is basically forced to give you more grace than it otherwise would want to.

This is another way to frame the problems with more recent "innovations" - while social media and the gig economy both arguably empower individual consumers and producers of both cultural output and of services like taxis, they do so in ways that fundamentally change the relationship and individualize the connections between consumers, producers, and the system that they interact through. And because nobody has as direct a connection to the owners and operators of that system, they have more power to increase their profits at the expense of everyone who actually has to use the system to function.

[–] UnseriousAcademic@awful.systems 9 points 3 months ago (3 children)

There's definitely something to this narrowing of opportunities idea. To frame it in a real bare bones way, it's people that frame the world in simplistic terms and then assume that their framing is the complete picture (because they're super clever of course). Then if they try to address the problem with a "solution", they simply address their abstraction of it and if successful in the market, actually make the abstraction the dominant form of it. However all the things they disregarded are either lost, or still there and undermining their solution.

It's like taking a 3D problem, only seeing in 2D, implementing a 2D solution and then being surprised that it doesn't seem to do what it should, or being confused by all these unexpected effects that are coming from the 3rd dimension.

Your comment about giving more grace also reminds me of work out there from legal scholars who argued that algorithmically implemented law doesn't work because the law itself is designed to have a degree of interpretation and slack to it that rarely translates well to an "if x then y" model.

[–] 200fifty@awful.systems 8 points 3 months ago (4 children)

I've thought about a similar idea before in the more minor context of stuff like note-taking apps -- when you're taking notes in a paper notebook, you can take notes in whatever format you want, you can add little pictures or diagrams or whatever, arranged however you want. Heck, you can write sheet music notation. When you're taking notes in an app, you can basically just write paragraphs of text, or bullet points, and maybe add pictures in some limited predefined locations if you're lucky.

Obviously you get some advantages in exchange for the restrictive format (you can sync/back up things to the internet! you can search through your notes! etc) but it's by no means a strict upgrade, it's more of a tradeoff with advantages and disadvantages. I think we tend to frame technological solutions like this as though they were strict upgrades, and often we aren't so willing to look at what is being lost in the tradeoff.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[–] mii@awful.systems 31 points 3 months ago (5 children)

I’m still waiting for even one argument for the usefulness of AI image generation that isn’t fucked up. Just one.

Grok seems so support nudity and deepfakes too according to some news articles I’ve seen because of course nothing screams more free speech than plastering the face of your favorite actor or political opponent into a porn scene, so now let’s see how long it takes the first bluecheck fucker to try and create CSAM with it, because I suppose that’ll be the point when it gets too hot even for Elon.

[–] HorseRabbit@lemmy.sdf.org 23 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

It's pretty great for DnD. A lot of people have trouble imagining things in full detail from a text or spoken description, so being able to generate images of the scene, characters, objects etc is super fun and adds a lot of richness to the experience.

[–] vithigar@lemmy.ca 12 points 3 months ago (19 children)

This is the best use I've found for it as well. Especially if I want to quickly create a unique token for an NPC.

Generally speaking I'll commission actual artists for pictures of PCs, but for a named NPC sorcerer who's just going to be in a handful of scenes? AI has been great.

load more comments (19 replies)
[–] UnseriousAcademic@awful.systems 22 points 3 months ago (3 children)

I'm banking on the primary use case being "getting Elon sued into oblivion by Disney" .

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] HowManyNimons@lemmy.world 31 points 3 months ago (3 children)
[–] MrShankles@reddthat.com 17 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

What a surprise, I have that same photo! The one he wanted nobody to ever see anymore. Whoops, guess it's on two servers now

[–] Etterra@lemmy.world 9 points 3 months ago

Careful not to cut yourself on that edge Elon.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 20 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Guess it’s appropriate that Musk should go from some sort of entrepreneurial tech guru who was going to save the planet to some right wing billionaire shitheel, steals “grok” from Heinlein, who went for sic-fi author darling to libertarian shitheel.

[–] gerikson@awful.systems 9 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (33 children)

Musk appropriating "grok" from Stranger in a Strange Land is on-brand for him, seeing as he fundamentally misunderstands Banks' Culture series and reduces it to "the one with the cool ship names".

Edited for clarity

load more comments (33 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] iAvicenna@lemmy.world 19 points 3 months ago

Giving Elon an image generator is like giving a toddler a bucket of paint, both is guaranteed to mess up the house

[–] Etterra@lemmy.world 11 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Is that Play-Doh baby on the right supposed to be Vance?

[–] dgerard@awful.systems 8 points 3 months ago

I think that's supposed to be Musk? Could be Vance

[–] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 9 points 3 months ago

Finally you don't even have to go off platform to post fake news on Twitter.

[–] gencha@lemm.ee 9 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I'd love to abuse this, but I refuse to use Twitter

[–] gerikson@awful.systems 10 points 3 months ago

cursory reading seems to indicate this feature is for ~~Elon-pleasuring suckers~~paying users anyway.

load more comments
view more: next ›