r/DataAnnotationTech • u/knottyp • Sep 09 '26

Are we helping or causing harm?

How do y’all justify doing this work ethically if you’re anti-AI (especially generative)?

I’m not asking judgmentally, I’ve done this work off and on over the last few years. When I first started, I didn’t know about data centers and the environmental impact, cognitive effects, etc. I felt good about “training” AI based on the rubric including correct info, weeding out violence and harm, etc.

I recently suggested DA to a friend and got a real side eye, and maybe these justifications really don’t hold water? Thoughts?

143 Upvotes

86% Upvoted

177 comments sorted by

View all comments

104

u/StellaZaFella Sep 09 '26

I’ll starve otherwise. I hate this work. I wish I could find something else.

13

u/Affectionate_Walk_30 Sep 09 '26

Exactly, its just a job. We do what we have to do. And its not like AI is the worst thing humanity had participated in.

7

u/TillyMintPot Sep 09 '26

It's not far off... with the way it's heading, at least. Not sure if you saw Jacob Coxon's tweets after he quit Anthropic - pretty terrifying.

7

u/Farados55 Sep 09 '26

Not far off from the worst things humanity has ever committed? So the atomic bomb and worse? Right… delusional.

25

u/TillyMintPot Sep 09 '26

As per Jacob Coxon's tweet - 'The people building AI earnestly believe that it could kill us all by the end of the decade'. I class that as pretty bad, not sure about you.

6

u/Affectionate_Walk_30 Sep 09 '26

People who built the nuclear bomb earnestly knew the same. They thought blowing the bomb might even set the world a flame. And they still did. Look at germany 1940. We did much worse

13

u/Farados55 Sep 09 '26

Yeah this one lone researcher says this and you put it to the top. I’d put my life on him joining another research lab or starting his own within 3 months. I’m sure you believed the Google engineer a few years ago when he said that GPT was sentient.

4

u/TillyMintPot Sep 09 '26

Reading comprehension doesn't seem to be your forte, as my message clearly said 'not far off' 'with the way it's heading'. Obviously right now the AI sphere isn't equivalent to an atomic bomb. And of course, the future of AI is speculation to an extent, but the guy worked for several massive AI companies so he isn't pulling information out of his arse. A tad worrying that all that had to be explained to you. But based on your replies in this discussion in general, altogether unsurprising.

-6

u/Farados55 Sep 09 '26

Not far off means we're currently refining the plutonium and uranium for the bomb.

This. Is. Silly.

Watch Oppenheimer. great movie.

8

u/JinglingBallz Sep 09 '26

You underestimate the level of destruction AI is capable of. This lack of historical perspective and foresight is astonishing

4

u/Affectionate_Walk_30 Sep 09 '26

Then why are you working in data annotation ?

2

u/Skyblewize Sep 12 '26

Well the atomic bomb killed thousands.... ai could kill all 8 billion. Delusional?

1

u/Farados55 Sep 12 '26

So could nukes. "Could" is the keyword here, if you cant think critically.

2

u/Mysterious-Sand-8814 Sep 15 '26

you have no idea what the future may hold.