2 ms·
Well, now instead of paying the photographers for the stock photos to use as headline pictures, people instead pay the AI firms for the stock pictures to use as
by Joker_vD 6d ago
Well, now instead of paying the photographers for the stock photos to use as headline pictures, people instead pay the AI firms for the stock pictures to use as headline pictures.
Which is "worse" by some metric, I'm sure.
- minitech 6d agoCouldn’t wait more than 3 minutes for someone’s actual position before setting up that straw man to take down?
- Joker_vD 6d agoThe actual position: "First, prove you're not an AI, and then we can discuss..." Yeah, no, I'll take myself being strangely prescient this morning.
- minitech 6d agoThe partial comment you’re quoting is - not even a position - not something you were remotely “prescient” about
- Joker_vD 6d agoPrecisely. There is no need to wait for "the position" to be formulated since a) it won't be; b) it's mostly "AI is bad because, full stop" anyhow, not even a strawman.
- minitech 6d ago> it's mostly "AI is bad because, full stop" anyhow Ooh, the rare* double straw man. Since you look like you could use the exercise in intellectual honesty, I’ll pose the question directly: can you think of any reason that the ability for anyone to generate fake photographs indistinguishable from reality with no skill, time, or money required might make the world a worse place? Cause harm? * I wish
- skeledrew 6d agoThe same could be said of commissioned paintings when photography became a thing. And yet here we are, and I doubt anyone - except maybe artists - would say the world is worse off.
- minitech 5d agoStop, stop, he’s already dead! You guys are getting straw everywhere.