• MyOpinion@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    8 days ago

    The problem with AI is that it pirates everyone’s work and then repackages it as its own and enriches the people that did not create the copywrited work.

  • futatorius@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    7 days ago

    Two intrinsic problems with the current implementations of AI is that they are insanely resource-intensive and require huge training sets. Neither of those is directly a problem of ownership or control, though both favor larger players with more money.

    • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      7 days ago

      And a third intrinsic problem is that the current models with infinite training data have been proven to never approach human language capability, from papers written by OpenAI in 2020 and Deepmind in 2022, and also a paper by Stanford which proposes AI simply have no emergent behavior and only convergent behavior.

      So yeah. Lots of problems.

      • andxz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        7 days ago

        While I completely agree with you, that is the one thing that could change with just one thing going right for one of all the groups that work on just that problem.

        It’s what happens after that that’s really scary, probably. Perhaps we all go into some utopian AI driven future, but I highly doubt that’s even possible.

  • Grimy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    8 days ago

    AI has a vibrant open source scene and is definitely not owned by a few people.

    A lot of the data to train it is only owned by a few people though. It is record companies and publishing houses winning their lawsuits that will lead to dystopia. It’s a shame to see so many actually cheering them on.

    • cyd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 days ago

      So long as there are big players releasing open weights models, which is true for the foreseeable future, I don’t think this is a big problem. Once those weights are released, they’re free forever, and anyone can fine-tune based on them, or use them to bootstrap new models by distillation or synthetic RL data generation.

  • RadicalEagle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    8 days ago

    I’d say the biggest problem with AI is that it’s being treated as a tool to displace workers, but there is no system in place to make sure that that “value” (I’m not convinced commercial AI has done anything valuable) created by AI is redistributed to the workers that it has displaced.

    • Pennomi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 days ago

      The system in place is “open weights” models. These AI companies don’t have a huge head start on the publicly available software, and if the value is there for a corporation, most any savvy solo engineer can slap together something similar.

  • Wren@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    8 days ago

    The biggest problem with AI is the damage it’s doing to human culture.

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      Not solving any of the stated goals at the same time.

      It’s a diversion. Its purpose is to divert resources and attention from any real progress in computing.

  • TheMightyCat@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    8 days ago

    No?

    Anyone can run an AI even on the weakest hardware there are plenty of small open models for this.

    Training an AI requires very strong hardware, however this is not an impossible hurdle as the models on hugging face show.

    • nalinna@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      8 days ago

      But the people with the money for the hardware are the ones training it to put more money in their pockets. That’s mostly what it’s being trained to do: make rich people richer.

      • Riskable@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        8 days ago

        This completely ignores all the endless (open) academic work going on in the AI space. Loads of universities have AI data centers now and are doing great research that is being published out in the open for anyone to use and duplicate.

        I’ve downloaded several academic models and all commercial models and AI tools are based on all that public research.

        I run AI models locally on my PC and you can too.

        • nalinna@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 days ago

          That is entirely true and one of my favorite things about it. I just wish there was a way to nurture more of that and less of the, “Hi, I’m Alvin and my job is to make your Fortune-500 company even more profitable…the key is to pay people less!” type of AI.

      • TheMightyCat@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        8 days ago

        But you can make this argument for anything that is used to make rich people richer. Even something as basic as pen and paper is used everyday to make rich people richer.

        Why attack the technology if its the rich people you are against and not the technology itself.

        • nalinna@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 days ago

          It’s not even the people; it’s their actions. If we could figure out how to regulate its use so its profit-generation capacity doesn’t build on itself exponentially at the expense of the fair treatment of others and instead actively proliferate the models that help people, I’m all for it, for the record.

  • DarkCloud@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    8 days ago

    Like Sam Altman who invests in Prospera, a private “Start-up City” in Honduras where the board of directors pick and choose which laws apply to them!

    The switch to Techno-Feudalism is progressing far too much for my liking.

  • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    8 days ago

    And those people want to use AI to extract money and to lay off people in order to make more money.

    That’s “guns don’t kill people” logic.

    Yeah, the AI absolutely is a problem. For those reasons along with it being wrong a lot of the time as well as the ridiculous energy consumption.

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      Dunno, the part about generative music (not like LLMs) I’ve tried, I think if I spent a few more years of weekly migraines on that, I’d become better.

  • umbraroze@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    7 days ago

    AI business is owned by a tiny group of technobros, who have no concern for what they have to do to get the results they want (“fuck the copyright, especially fuck the natural resources”) who want to be personally seen as the saviours of humanity (despite not being the ones who invented and implemented the actual tech) and, like all big wig biz boys, they want all the money.

    I don’t have problems with AI tech in the principle, but I hate the current business direction and what the AI business encourages people to do and use the tech for.

  • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    7 days ago

    I don’t really agree that this is the biggest issue, for me the biggest issue is power consumption.

    • CitricBase@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      7 days ago

      That is a big issue, but excessive power consumption isn’t intrinsic to AI. You can run a reasonably good AI on your home computer.

      The AI companies don’t seem concerned about the diminishing returns, though, and will happily spend 1000% more power to gain that last 10% better intelligence. In a competitive market why wouldn’t they, when power is so cheap.