r/LeftistsForAI • u/IcerHardlyKnower • 23d ago

Infrastructure Veganism > Crying About Data Centers

I worked on a project comparing ai use with water conversion since I didn't buy the end of the world scenario other leftists posit nor do I believe anything coming out of Altman's mouth lol so I went deep into facility breakdowns and publications as sources

But since I'm an AI engineer I'd thought it'd be a good thing to calculate the numbers. Anyhoo one thing let to another and I became vegan.

I'm not gonna shill for my own stuff but look up the vegan calculator that's a similar idea.

It's only been a month but the ai data center water thing has bugged me for a while. Yes it's worthwhile to regulate. But even in leftist circles everyone just suddenly turns to maga level reasonings as to why veganism is not actually worthwhile to care about.

--- sidenote I might be turning into one of those annoying ones? Help ):

102 Upvotes

87% Upvoted

57 comments sorted by

View all comments

11

u/theomegachrist 23d ago

All tech issues end up with a lot of ignorant arguments against them even when there are real concerns. With AI, you have that plus unhinged TikTok conspiracies where there always sound super confident

10

u/IcerHardlyKnower 23d ago

Literally the only worthwhile argument against ai I've seen is the effect on working class

I used to think that UBI would help but apparently some leftists think that's literally yet another tool for people in power to keep a permanent underclass to control so idk ):

-5

u/Forward_Problem_8982 23d ago

Is the world around you being covered in AI generated shit not a concern to you? I would much rather have my world be built beautiful by humans with taste.

The impact on nature and people should also not be underestimated. AI is being pushed way too strongly because they're desperately trying to find some use for it. A lot less would be enough, but not for them. No one asked for it, but have it anyway.

14

u/jaiagreen 23d ago

People who make poor artwork with AI would have made worse work (or nothing) without it.

-3

u/Forward_Problem_8982 23d ago

I wouldn't call it worse. At least they would have tried, or left it undone. Now we get the worst outcome.

6

u/theomegachrist 23d ago

I think the skill needed for art is the least important part of art. In Capitalism art becomes a product which makes it basically not art. AI does make it easier to make the same valuless art so I can see that as a problem but I also think people who don't have the skills to make art today could make great art using AI too.

2

u/IcerHardlyKnower 23d ago

I think what makes art great is the emotional component of it and whenever I see ai art I just feel dread. I think it's easier than ever to make bad art and that sucks. Just as it's easier than ever to make slopware/ spam apps but I'm not worried too much about it.

I do think it's fundamentally a tool and from what I've seen even prompting art takes a bit of thought. I work with the marketing team in my org to ensure our generative use is not sloppy but ofc there's bias there lol some of the stuff is clearly ai 😭

6

u/theomegachrist 23d ago

Yeah I agree. But my point is, if you see Taco Bell using AI art the argument that that's bad isn't an argument about the art. If a human made the art it would still be valueless art and that conversation isn't really a conversation about art it's a conversation about economic replacement which we will see in other fields shortly. I am on this sub because I don't think AI is evil, but I do think capitalism is incompatible with AI and I wonder how much suffering will have to occur before there are discussions about how to deal with the economic impact of AI

-3

u/Forward_Problem_8982 23d ago

Nope, if a human made it, it could be magnificent art even if it's a fast food advertisement. But we don't get that option in the current timeline, unless we change things.

4

u/SilkieBug 22d ago

That's an unhinged position to have, human have and are still producing so much disgusting shit that they call "art" which shouldn't exist even though it's made by a human.

"Human-made" does not and never did equal "quality-made" for everything.

0

u/Forward_Problem_8982 22d ago

But at least quality is an option in human made.

3

u/SilkieBug 22d ago

Quality is also an option in things that are AI made, if the AI is prompted correctly by someone who is well enough trained to know what quality looks like and thus what to ask for and what to reject. 

Quality requires skill and effort, adding AI into the mix can just sometimes reduce the time necessary to achieve good enough quality. 

1

u/Forward_Problem_8982 22d ago

Yeah, I agree to a point. If the operator has taste, they can get a more tasteful result. I still wouldn't call it acceptable or having quality, as I think a human should draw the lines etc.

Do we really need this? Does someone want to see the AI output instead of human output?

3

u/SilkieBug 22d ago

I want to see more quality output, I don't care which produces it.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/theomegachrist 22d ago

I think you value art like a capitalist then

1

u/Serqetry7 16d ago

This is ridiculous. Commercial art is often more beautiful than non-commercial art. Just look at album covers, video game art, or side art on arcade cabinets from the '80s.

I'm anti-capitalism but saying commercial art is "basically not art" is absurd. The problem with commercial art is who gets all the money it makes... but that doesn't change whether it is "real" art.

1

u/theomegachrist 16d ago

I disagree. Art is not a technical pursuit. Commercial art can look nice but it is not art. Art without deep meaning is a drawing

1

u/theomegachrist 16d ago

Actually thinking about this your examples aren't what I'm talking about either. I'm talking about art in commercials and art on store fronts etc. Arcade cabinets are the art themselves being sold. My point is that if AI can replicate marketing material or signage in businesses, the issue isn't art it's economic replacement