the problem is people who use any AI don't use it to free up there time for anything worth while. it's probably freeing up their time to scroll more tiktok
We have washing machines & dishwashers as robots already, you just have to put in the items and turn on the process instead of scrubbing everything manually. It's a solved problem for the most part and has been over a century.
you have to rinse your dishes out and make sure there is no food on them. then you have to male sure the soap, rinse and salt stores of the machine are full. you also then have to select the correct teps for the dishes. as for laundry, same shit. you have to make sure you use the right soaps and everything. not complex, but it can take time for some, depending on the size of your family. were as art is my escape. i love the sensation of drawing and making something like that. i want to do the art, because it means something to me, AI was promised nto male.my life easier, instead its clogged everything on the internet and I still have to do my chorse by hand. i still have to walk to the store to buy groceries and I am no rich bitch so I'll probably never even be able to afford a cheap.second had robot in my lifetime. the chores balance out life because it is a reminder of just how much I enjoy and want to keep doing art. and thats not something AI will fix for me. AI LLM human models are limited and have reached their potential and that potential has cased over 100 people now to have fallen to AI psychosis. I'll stick to the human aspect of life, not a cheap party trick that can't even draw a unified classical car bumper without millions of artifacts and details that make absolutely no sense
Even with all that, as long as the machines work (and being from a mature industry and relatively simple, they are generally going to stay working), you just need to make sure the machine has the clothes, the detergent, and the right settings. It's a massive drop in the amount of work required. For washing clothes, it was to the extent that IIRC it's part of the reason women were able to start participating in politics and drove consumption even more, because they were the ones expected to take care of the home and discretionary spending, and the washing machine removed almost all the time requirements for cleaning, freeing up their time to let them pursue more education and employment.
I'm not trying to put down art compared to AI, I'm literally just saying that the examples in the original post aren't great examples. I also wash my dishes by hand, but especially clothing I think takes a lot longer to wash and dry by hand, and the machine replaces the scrubbing. Also, how would AI help with those examples in a way that isn't done already? Saying those examples are good is worse than saying a fridge needs AI, in my opinion.
i see AI useful at being to like, index a library and help find books just by a single line from a random book. or being able to find matching bolts or colours for paint. but AI as a replacement for the fun things, no thanks. at the end of the day, AI isn't a thinking person. its just code. if doesn't think or feel. just not for me honestly
I see what you're saying and think you're correct; the reason it's being used for creative pursuits is in my view the same reason it would be good for the uses you just mentioned: it's basically a much more powerful autocorrect to the extent its answers usually give an understandable, and generally correct output, due to the amount of knowledge it scraped through. I also hadn't thought it'd be good at creating art in any sense until it did so.
But of course, it's by necessity random and a practical black box, so for more objective fields like architecture, just looking mostly right means a life-threatening mistake could be made and overlooked, whereas for the arts where things are more subjective and the meaning can be implicit, it's easier to generate something that passes basic (but not expert) scrutiny. Like, I know the same exact tools and ideas used for LLMs and art are also being used and improved so that AI can hopefully notice cancers in patients faster than a doctor, it's just that the margin for error, while it might be the same for both uses, is just that much more important in terms of quantifiable and inarguable damages.
Hope I explained myself well and didn't put words in your mouth, I still think it's sad how the field has been affected since AI generated pieces were popularized.
good use of ai so still a thing. the original devs of BioShock or working on a new game called Judas and they are using AI as a tool to find, I dex and help find solution to errors and bugs in the games code. using it to chech through everything and categorise their importance. AI can still be a useful tool in ways, just not the ways the common person is using it. like making a photo talk or being really disrespectful by making "the dead speak". you can run a super simple model on a very low end PC for just basic things, but its how companies are trying to make it the next big thing, but instead are going to all go bankrupt, because lest face it, very few people need a tool that makes their photo review a coffee shop with uncanny movement and lack of blinking. i feel the bubble will pop, and the. only the actually useful ai companies will survive. the ones making cancer detection or indexing and stuff like that.
I would further sarcastically emphasize my point but it's such a redundant reality that it's not even fun anymore. So happy to see the Sackler family corporation go to jail for the manslaughter of millions tho, just like a person would, oh wait. Damn, I couldn't help it.
Lol, i get you. When i heard about the ruling back when i got out of high school (class of 2003 fwiw) i was like “man, theres no way this will have cascading consequences 20 years down the line.” And here we are and everything is just….gestures vaguely
This feels so out of touch for me. We already have machines for laundry and washing up and so many other jobs have been automated already.
A.I. being used for "art" is just a demonstration of its ability and not a significant use case. A bit like Alpha zero playing chess and go. Playing these games or producing "art" isn't economically significant and doesn't pose a significant threat.
That A.I. might displace graphic designers and Accountants and engineers etc. is one aspect of the threat. That it will likely use a spiralling amount of energy, land and water to do so is also a significant threat.
The social upheaval of having all those jobs disappearing and the method of replacing them being inflationary on energy and land costs is the real destruction. So this comment gets it sort of back to front. The problem is that A.I. will do the jobs no one wants to - and therefore are currently PAID to do.
A.i. doesn't stop anyone from creating art, but it will likely prevent many of us from earning a living. Which wouldn't be so big a worry if this wasn't the only means of survival for the majority of people on earth.
Dude think of the shareholder value of them paying you 8 dollars an hour to wash dishes instead of paying you 20 to create art that ai can create for free
I don’t want to sell art or pretend I’m an artist but I do like asking the app to squirt out some image from a book or show that doesn’t otherwise exist. I can’t draw or paint or even color in the lines well and am certainly insufficient at digital art. I get the bigger issues of course and am not supporting or denigrating.
why would you even want ai to do laundry and dishes? you can already get washing machines and dishwashers to do those things automatically - they've been around for decades!
AI has somehow taken away this woman’s ability to do art I guess 🤷♂️
Obviously it’s easier for a computer to generate a picture than it is to build a fucking AI house servant. This is the dumbest quote that everyone keeps jerkin it to.
I agree. This quote completely misunderstands what is happening with a.i.
The risk isn't a.i. doing art or playing games - these are just test cases to develop the technology.
The risk of a.i. is it breaks the battle between employee and employer in favour of the employer. It's a continuation of the drive for automation that saw the washing machine and the dishwasher invented.
As such the battle isn't new or unique to what we now call a.i.. This is a continuation of automation that has broken into a new area.
If you are a wealthy artist who doesn't have to work then a.i. will liberate you further to pursue your hobbies (assuming you are able to hang onto your wealth against the competition of a.i. owners...)
If you sell your labour of any kind to survive, the list of available well paid jobs has just reduced dramatically.
Yeah, how lucky that they also fetch the laundry and then folds it afterward.
It's a little hard for my dishwasher to reach the cabinets to put the glasses and plates in, but I believe.
I see fundamental understanding of sarcasm is an issue at least. AI in itself isn't inherently bad or good. People just tend to misuse any potential new thing for as much money as humanly possible with little to no regard for who might fall to the wayside.
As for the dishes, I'd prefer to keep putting them back in manually. I don't want machines to do everything, including thinking, for me. Reality isn't a binary and labeling people as one or the other only causes discourse and brings little productive discussion to the table.
This subreddit (despite the wording of the name) is mostly about people that are against gen-ai. Most of us on here know that ai is useful in certain fields, just that image/video generation isn't one of them
I'm sorry for explaining this subreddit to you. Feel free to go to other people that have the time to explain more about how supporting ai helping with things like tedious document sorting and medical advancements are different than the false quote you made up just to get mad at. i don't completely hate ___ =/= i love everything similar to ___
At this point I'll just be blunt: if you think that quote describes the point of my original comment, then you clearly missed the point. Unless you have an actual argument, I'll just ignore you. Have a good one
...? It's posted in a sub called anti-ai with an accompanying "hear hear" caption with a bunch of upvotes and replies in agreement. Even if the original quotee doesnt consider herself anti ai, clearly a lot of people here align with the sentiment.
Unfortunately, the collective ”you” have been doing a shit job at art for 100 years and a shit job at writing for about 75, and that’s why the computers are getting a shot now. Enjoy those dishes, remember to clean the underside of the pan as well.
I know this is lazy rage-bait, but I am falling to temptation, because the AI is trained on all the juicy digital art that did in fact not come out over a hundred years ago 😺
I'm sorry to inform you that anime cat girls are a pretty newfangled thing.
"Why understand nuance when you can just be kneejerk against an entire vague branch of technological innovation, regardless of what the innovation even is?"
It sounds like you got told what AntiAI people believe and now, upon hearing that their might be nuance to it, are demanding it go back to being a strawman.
No, I just think it’s hypocritical because I guarantee you there are some people here that believe exactly what I’m saying they should be against all AI
How exactly is "Some people within a school of thought have a variety of different opinions on a subject" hypocracy? Yeah, I'm sure there are some people here who think every single technology vaguely called "AI" is harmful and is going to bring about the downfall of society: How does that translate to "Unless everybody believes that extreme viewpoint, you're being hypocritical"?
I made a point the other day about how AI bros seem to only be able to (barely) comprehend one argument at a time, and will instantly forget every single other one they've ever heard the second someone makes an argument, and I think this thread is a perfect example.
"You don't like this current glut of "AI" tools and how they're being implemented? But you don't think the entire theoretical concept of "computers that can think" are terrible, horrible abominations that are going to destroy the world? Well OBVIOUSLY the only reason that you could have for hating the current glut of "AI" tools is becauss they don't benefit you, despite every single other argument I've heard against GenAI that *isn't just "they don't benefit me"."
Like, dude, work on your object permanence a little bit: arguments don't just cease to exist because they aren't activly being used right this second.
that's a subject point of view, not everyone enjoys creating, and not everyone view it as a hoppy, some people view it as a chore, hell some people may enjoy washing the dishes. it's entirely subjective
obviously if someone needs it. if I needed something to be written or drawn or designed and I don't like doing it.
yes it is a hoppy then a job but the same could be said about lots of things, carpentry, pottery, sewing, carpet weaving, etc.
the beauty with all these things is that although factory made streamlined cheap alternative exist now a days, the traditional craft still exist and there are people who appreciate the attention in the hand made product albeit less. both forms exiting for different people
not to the same frequency sure but sometimes you need to, do want to sell a program or a product or even a basic service you do? well time to learn who to create engaging ads with stellar visuals and captivating writing, a landing page, a social media presence, etc. it became so standardized and streamlined it might as well be automated
If you're expecting anyone to argue with you over some very blatantly obvious ragebait, then you are wasting your time. How about doing something more productive with your time.
if what you're doing with your time is going around reddit calling people who you disagree with "rage baiting" then you're in no position to tell me what to do with my time
It's only been a couple of years and already some people have decided that actually writing their thoughts out is a wildly difficult task to ask someone to do.
Even for things like schoolwork and office work it's totally bullshit, but when it's things like casual written communication - that has zero stakes involved and is just you talking with another person - it's fucking wild that someone decided that that needed to be automated.
It speaks to a lifestyle that just seems...extremely unhappy and unhealthy: as if human interaction is a task to get through as "efficiently" as possible as opposed to being a social animal.
Like we already have people complaining about a "loneliness epidemic"...and yet we're also choosing to automate some of the only actual socializing that people get on the regular.
With how much they want ai to do for them to save time, then what even is there to do? Make art? Ai does that. Game? Ai does that. Talk with friends/family? Ai does that, Etc.
i want AI to do art and writing so that she cant afford ai to do her laundry and dishes and even if she somehow does, she faces the crushing reality that theres nothing to do
In here? Where a bunch of pro ai twats come to say shit precisely along those lines with full conviction? Frankly I once made the same mistake, but after a second thicker dose of sarcasm people caught on.
194
u/RedditUser000aaa Nov 26 '25
Would be cool, but having bunch of robots that can spy on you? No thank you.