Preaching to the Void

Will anyone read any of this? Not likely. Will anyone that DOES read any of this already agree with it? Likely. Will I post it anyway? Already did.

[pttv]

Last night I dreamt about a news article saying that the U.S. had developed a nuclear warhead so powerful that there was no unpopulated area on Earth large enough to safely test it, so they were having NASA develop the world's largest missile and fire it at Mars instead.

And honestly? I give it a year.

[odyver]

alright I've got to do some quick math to explain attitudes towards AI to my boss.

we're looking to create an AI policy, and when we were talking about this, my boss (older millennial) was genuinely shocked to hear that younger people do not (seem) to view AI positively (a la the recent commencement speakers being booed)

please rb for larger sample size!

Question 1/3

What is your age, and do you feel AI is a net positive or net negative in our lives today?

under 18, AI is a net positive

under 18, AI is a net negative

18-29, AI is a net positive

18-29, AI is a net negative

30-45, AI is a net positive

30-45, AI is a net negative

46-60, AI is a net positive

46-60, AI is a net negative

over 60, AI is a net postive

over 60, AI is a net negative

Voting ended onJun 11

[odyver]

Question 2/3

How often do you visit or interact with museums/archives (whether in person or online)?

Frequently (multiple times per month)

Often (multiple times per year)

Occasionally (a couple times per year)

Rarely (once every couple of years)

Never :(

Voting ended onJun 11

[odyver]

Question 3/3

If you saw a museum was using AI in exhibits, marketing, research, etc., would you be more or less inclined to visit that museum?

under 18, more inclined

under 18, less inclined

18-29, more inclined

18-29, less inclined

30-45, more inclined

30-45, less inclined

46-60, more inclined

46-60, less inclined

over 60, more inclined

over 60, less inclined

Voting ended onJun 11

Thank you for helping with this data collection. Please rb for as big a sample as possible!

🫶

[pttv]

Decommodify money. Make it a luxury insetead of a necessity and, like, half of capitalism's problems are solved.

[pttv]

I want the USA to become a myth. I want future generations to roll thier eyes at the very concept of it—to laugh at the idea that a society so nakedly built on the foundations of cruelty and greed could ever have existed at all.

[pttv]

Me reading the arguments in the replies:

[pttv]

I'm gonna be honest: the first thing that goes through my head whenever anyone follows me is "Why?"

[animentality]

so this should be illegal.

[pttv]

So would-be murderers can be confident that nobody will suspect a thing until the case is already cold.

I don't mean to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but this is such an obviously, irredemibly stupid idea, that between the implications that there are people that evil or that stupid among us, the former is actually more comforting.

[pttv]

Okay, perhaps I've been a bit unfair to AI. What if "AI Trainer" was a job? What if people could make art for the express purpose of training an AI model and get paid for it? It wouldn't establish socialism or anything, but it would at least get rid of one of the biggest ethical concerns with AI.

As it stands, if you support AI, you might as well support sweatshops: they both practically steal people's labor for the purpose of making profit.

[pttv]

I want the USA to become a myth. I want future generations to roll thier eyes at the very concept of it—to laugh at the idea that a society so nakedly built on the foundations of cruelty and greed could ever have existed at all.

[pttv]

If you're going to call AI image generators an "art tool" and their users "artists", you must also call these things "cooking utensils" and their users "chefs".

[pttv]

If advertising was made illegal, how many of the modern internet's problems would simply solve themselves?

[pttv]

They say we need the second amendment because we need guns to "defend ourselves from tyranny".

Its been months since the tyranny started, but I check the news and I don't see ICE agents, Trump and billionares getting shot.

[pttv]

Tumblr, I need help.

Can anybody think of any scenario where using generative AI to make something is superior to making it yourself? The only thing I can think of that might qualify is an artist with aphantasia using an AI image generator to help them brainstorm, but that's it.

LLMs are, in essence, the world's most expensive party trick and have no utility for serious writing—fiction or non. Using an AI image generator to maybe get something close to what you envisioned—when you have the option to just draw it yourself and get exactly what you wanted—doesn't make sense to me. Even using it for just one part, like a piece of the background or a phony product label or something: you'd get a better result—and probably in fewer iterations—if you just did it yourself! And nothing needs to be said about AI music.

I simply don't see a use case for it.

[guerrillatech]

[aurizzism]

Begging them to instead tie rent to the minimum wage.

[pttv]

Not a good idea. First off, this would make ever raising the minimum wage useless, because the mandated rise in rent would eat the raise. Second, one "price" is fixed while the other varies wildly.

By tying rent to the minimum wage, you are essentially making it impossible to build or sell housing that's worth above a certain amount. Depending on location, this could mean not being able to afford to build anything at all.

Tying minimum wage to (what I assume to be) the median price of housing is a much more natural solution. The majority of housing (because it's the median) will still be affordable, and there will still be housing to either side of the median for those who want more or less.

Ideally housing would be free, of course.

[mysharona1987]

[pttv]

Because motivation is the problem here. Because well-paying jobs just fall out of the sky and the only thing stopping you from providing for youself is "motivation". You know that some people are lucky enough to work full-time and still need SNAP because their job doesn't pay them enough?

You Bootstrap fucks will bend over backwards to defend owners' "right" to depress wages because "that's what your labor is worth" and "if you want more, work harder". You refuse to raise the minimum wage because somehow the label of "unskilled labor" means that you don't need to earn enough to stay alive. And then you have the audacity to turn around and tell us that needing help to buy food makes us the problem.

And that's not even mentioning that the need to earn money in order to access food, water, or shelter is something we should be working towards abolishing. But that's another discussion.

[depsidase]

[reddpaw]

It does happen, but not as often as they want to make it seem.

Dishes of candy at an office/during Halloween, free samples, and free donuts back when I worked at a place with free donuts set out in the break room every weekend, are a free things that come to mind.

But a few jerks being greedy shouldn't mean the entire concept needs to get thrown out, or that "take only what you need" can't be enforced in anyway.

[pttv]

Those run out. If you only take one donut now, you might want another one later only to find they've all been eaten, so you take two (and force yourself to eat the second one, but I digress).

Some people reason as if the only motivation behind hoarding is greed, but that's not it at all. In reality, people will scarcly ever take more than they can utilize. It's common sense: who would want to have six jerry cans of gas taking up space in their house just for the sake of taking up space? Who would want to take more food than they can eat so that the extra can go bad? Who would want to have bottles of medicine they'll never take clogging up their cupboard just to have them there?

If things are free, people will take more, but perish the narrative that consumption now is the baseline and people will become greedy. What's really happening is people now are starved and consumption will rise to the baseline.

[pttv]

Friendly reminder that it's "patriotic" to venerate domestic terrorists.