> That sliver probably represents most of the work that used to exist for a freelance illustrator, but it's a vanishingly small percentage of AI generated images.
I prefer to get my illegally copied images from only the most humanely trained LLM instead of illegally copying them myself like some neanderthal or, heaven forbid, asking a human to make something. Such a though is revolting; humans breathe so loud and sweat so much and are so icky. Hold on - my wife just texted me. "Hey chat gipity, what is my wife asking about now?" /s
Quite dumb. If it were a book it would be "Infinite Jest", and the receipts of everyone who bought the pillows could be used to enter into some inane raffle.
What's giving Daniel Ek a hard-on is that the music industry realised AI isn't a big threat. AI first made Spotify's stock plummet from $300 to under $80, and once the realisation kicked in that the music industry is more about fame (i.e. real people other people want to relate to) than music itself, the stock price climbed up to $600.
I didn't say that amazon warehouses > low income housing, but I've edited my comment to make it more clear. Warehouses and distribution centers need to exist, even if they don't use drones.
This is your opinion, not fact. Local communities can disallow them through zoning and planning, regardless of what consumers want. YIMBY for housing, NIMBY for whatever the Amazon paperclip maximizer wants.
Industries local citizens want in their area. If you don't have the votes, you don't get the industrial zoning, warehouses, data centers, etc. Go elsewhere.
Right, not in my backyard. If they want to defend theirs, that is their choice. If they don't, and they want the noise, the traffic, and the air pollutants, I encourage them to seek these projects for their backyard.
> Regulators, environmental advocates, and community groups in the United States (U.S.) are concerned about air pollution associated with the proliferating e-commerce and warehousing industries. Nationwide datasets of warehouse locations, traffic, and satellite observations of the traffic-related pollutant nitrogen dioxide (NO2) provide a unique capability to evaluate the air quality and environmental equity impacts of these geographically-dispersed emission sources. Here, we show that the nearly 150,000 warehouses in the U.S. worsen local traffic-related air pollution with an average near-warehouse NO2 enhancement of nearly 20% and are disproportionately located in marginalized and minoritized communities. Near-warehouse truck traffic and NO2 significantly increase as warehouse density and the number of warehouse loading docks and parking spaces increase. Increased satellite-observed NO2 near warehouses underscores the need for indirect source rules, incentives for replacing old trucks, and corporate commitments towards electrification. Future ground-based monitoring campaigns may help track impacts of individual or small clusters of facilities.
Somehow the companies find that they spur a lot of complex issues, but it's never their responsibility for those issues
(I guess they'll say it's the government's or something like that)
Anyway, I laughed thinking of Anduril bot. Now that we're talking about this, the future of life institute made a short movie about technology and ceos saying whatever they need to sell Ai products that can suggest the use of weapons or retaliation in defense https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9npWiTOHX0
It is not inevitable, almost nothing is... This just bothers me because so many people in tech talk about things as being "inevitable" when it's just a lazy resignation to the current zeitgeist.
There are a plethora of other forces at work beyond "the market".
Yes, if no one imagines anything different the future will turn out as we expect. But with even small changes to legislation, norms and culture thing can turn out completely different. It is only inevitable if we resign ourselves to the status quo.
> But with even small changes to legislation, norms and culture thing can turn out completely different.
Those are the qualities that define "the market". What are the other forces you speak of?
Markets can change. They have many times before. But, and call me unimaginative if you will, I struggle to see why anyone would want to pay substantially more to ensure that comments on YouTube are written by a real, live human, let alone enough people to sustain the service. It is not like you are face-to-face at the bar. It is a blob of text that has always been disassociated from what human involvement there may have been behind the scenes.
Inevitable in the strictest literal sense may be too much, but the chances of the market changing here seem infinitesimally small to the point that "inevitable" is close enough.
I see this attitude over and over again, particularly where it comes to regulating things like AI and bans on social media. Tech would rather do nothing if "it's complicated", or had any downside to anyone while ignoring the rampant downsides impacting everyone right now. Sometimes it comes across as thoughtful policy making, but more and more I see it as a crutch for intellectual laziness and in some cases dishonesty.
I prefer to get my illegally copied images from only the most humanely trained LLM instead of illegally copying them myself like some neanderthal or, heaven forbid, asking a human to make something. Such a though is revolting; humans breathe so loud and sweat so much and are so icky. Hold on - my wife just texted me. "Hey chat gipity, what is my wife asking about now?" /s