if AI can exist, it will inevitably exist

Unrelated to the question of ableism, this specifically logic that’s pushed by tech companies in general, that their decisions were inevitable and therefore there is no point in questioning them.

Look at how modern LLMs work. They’re trained in large data centers owned by private companies using giant corpuses of data that were largely obtained without the permission or knowledge of the people who created it. Then, to use them, the weights are loaded into an amount of memory that’s out of reach for most consumer desktops and users must call into the LLM using an API. Working memory of a conversation doesn’t persist in between messages or tool calls, so the entire history must be loaded into its context window on every call. In other words, all the “learning” for these models must take place up front in training and outside of taking context into account, it doesn’t actually adjust to learn new things about the world. There are workarounds for this, of course, to simulate the experience of interacting with something that can learn, but they have their limitations and aren’t reliable yet. I could go on. Running probabilistic process on deterministic hardware is an area that we may see more work on soon.

Every single step of that description had alternatives that would be more likely to be chosen outside of a capitalist system. They could be more eco friendly. They could be more efficient. They could be more powerful and learn from your interactions in way that persists. And a lot of these changes would delay the exposure of LLMs to the general public and see them spending longer in academia. But that would be okay because we wouldn’t have the profit motive at the center of this inflating a giant bubble that’s poised to pop and flatten the economy. Bottom line is this stuff was pushed out and hyped up well before it was ready and well before it was able to be scaled up ethically and with the working class in mind. None of this was inevitable.

So? Disabled people aren’t magically excused from abhorrent behavior simply because they’re disabled. Is it easier for some disabled people to create art with AI than without it? Sure. But that’s true irrespective of disability.

It’s only inappropriate to judge someone for something that directly relates to their disability. You’re just using disability as an excuse to churn out slop.

I cannot think of a single disability that would prevent someone from creating art without AI, without also disabling them so completely that they would be able to create art with AI. A quadriplegic person can create art if they want. And it will have infinitely more soul than some slop by someone hiding behind a disability.

Assuming they are disabled, which a passerby like myself cannot be expected to know, that does not excuse the deliberate choice to use ethically unsound technology. It’s especially true in this case, as even if a disability limits your potential as a visual artist, you’ll gladly commission somebody if you have any respect for the craft. I know this because I too have such a disability, and it hurts. It hurts knowing I might forever depend on the hands of others to bring some of my ideas to life, but you know what? That only strengthens my appreciation of visual artists and their work. I’d rather commission a talented artist to mix my silly brainwaves with their personal flourishes and create something meaningful, ten times over, then throw some words at an industrialized theft machine to get soulless slop.

got any links to that event?

Hahaha you’re the only person I’ve ever met who cares about “marking” edits.

“Dishonest.” lol!! Dry your tears, sweetie

What do you mean by “Clankers”? Clanker is a term for robots and AI. So are you saying robots and AI love to play the “disabled card”?

You literally misunderstood the entire thread! Lmao

I wish I had your unearned confidence. Is that a feddit.org thing? I see a surprising number of assholes from feddit.org

deleted by creator