this post was submitted on 09 Oct 2023
419 points (95.8% liked)
Technology
59145 readers
2234 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Yeah printing is dangerous because it'll be lot easy to write lewd, dangerous books! Back then you had to hire people to do so!
It honestly been really enlightening for me seeing all the same arguments that were made against the printing press and the camera being made against generative AI for text and images. Shows just how little people have changes over hundreds of years.
Ah yes, photorealistic images (and videos) are as effective as text.
Btw that also is an unfair argument because printing technology printed same book many times. You still need an author to write source text.
AI generates different images within minutes.
But please continue pretending AI generated images and videos are not a problem.
the printing press decreased the speed of publication by a larger margin (months to hours for a big book like the bible) and aguably kicked off a century of incredibly bloody warfare with luther and then the counter reformation.
I dont see how being able to get a decent image of Marx with tits from a few mins of generating images is so much more dangerous.
You still needed writers to come up with a new material for printing press. It only increased distribution of existing material.
Which isn't case with machine generated text and images. You can get any hateful or depraved output within minutes.
That was exactly the point the church made against the printing press, without needing scribes anyone could come up with whatever foul heresy they liked and publish it for distribution.
The chief difference between now and then is what we consider unpermissable. Otherwise the agrument is the same, we cannot trust people to publish whatever they like or terrible things will happen.
It's really not a problem. We have both open source and proprietary solutions for generative AI. If you have the hardware for it, you can generate images locally for free. If you don't, just use one of the many available services.
It's literally giving the power of expression to almost everyone, including artists.
Also let's not talk about jobs/money. Technology replacing jobs isn't something new and that's what humanity should strive toward.