• jsomae@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    3 hours ago

    We let environmentalism become an individual issue, and that was a mistake. Can we not do this for AI? It’s a society-wide problem, not something you can solve by measuring your own personal AI footprint.

  • redwattlebird@lemmings.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 hour ago

    AI vegan is not a thing and shall never be.

    The correct term is Technophile. Anyone obsessed with tech would never hand it off to a third party to do when they can go through the joy of learning themselves.

    • Sergio@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      3 hours ago

      They are “journalism vegans”. They are choosing to abstain from actual journalism for clickbaiting, herd mentality, and personal lack of skill reasons.

  • UltraBlack@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    6 hours ago

    I want to avoid it but with google making sure that search results get worse and worse I’m in a bit of a pickle. Other search engines still feel lile they’re a bit behind though

    • fishy@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Yup, these things are still garbage for >90% of all applications people are jamming them into. Breathed a sigh of relief when my company CEO said he doesn’t see us using AI for more than can center routing for at least the next several years.

    • stoicmaverick@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Every last bit of it? What is your stance on use of AI for tasks such as data analysis of massive sets for scientific research, or procedural automation of massive operations?

      • petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Yes, I am also frequently accosted by Google’s data analysis of massive sets for scientific research. I can’t tell you how many times they’ve forcefully inserted research analysis of large data sets into my search results.

      • Nalivai@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        4 hours ago

        AI doesn’t exist, machine learning algorithms can be useful and are used with no controversy, generative bullshit is basically useless.

        • stoicmaverick@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 hours ago

          You’re using a lot of very loosely defined terms with a lot of certainty. Machine learning is AI, we just usually apply it to the more simple versions of it. Where do you personally draw the line? I fully understand the plethora of risks, downsides, and injustices that can potentially be involved in the matter, but I legitimately don’t understand the extremist level hatred that some people express to anything that could hold the title of AI. To me, it parallels with someone saying that they hate ionizing radiation. Frequently, it’s also bad, and your entirely reasonable to try and avoid it on a daily basis, but it also has many uses that are beneficial and life-saving.

  • reksas@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    ·
    11 hours ago

    i wonder if they came up with such term to mock those who dont want to use ai and possibly actual vegans on the side.

    • Jason2357@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      edit-2
      11 hours ago

      They use to mock us with “Luddite” but the Technologists looked into that actual movement (rather than the caricature) and agreed, “yeah sure, like them”. That took the sting out of the pejorative, so they picked another mocked group to connect it with.

  • kadaverin0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    ·
    12 hours ago

    This is the dumbest shit I’ve ever read. Refusing to submit to corpo ratfuckery isn’t a lifestyle choice. It’s common sense.

  • normalexit@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    88
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    14 hours ago

    Abstaining from a thing does not make one a vegan. That’s not how any of this works.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      11 hours ago

      It’s like how they put the word gate after something to say that it is a scandal involving the former word.

      Somesort of political scandal involving road maintenance? Oh yes well that’s roadgate then. Even though the Watergate scandal was in fact it scandal in the watergate hotel, rather than a scandal about water.

      • JuxtaposedJaguar@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        13 hours ago

        “Vegan sex” is actually a different thing. It’s penetration but you stop before you cum.

        • Tired@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          12 hours ago

          If the human you’re fucking consented, then consuming their fluids is vegan. Hell if they consent, eating them would be vegan too.

          Animals do not consent to having fluids extracted or their lives taken and flesh consumed. Animal agriculture keeps animals in filthy, torturous conditions too, which no animal would ever consent to either.

            • Tired@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              9 hours ago

              It was kept in captivity by you though, which is not it’s natural habitat so any choices it made were, arguably, under duress.

              If you lived by a creek and regularly recognised a fish swimming by, and one day this fish killed itself in front of you- you still shouldn’t eat it as fish contain a lot of parasites and there’s very likely also something toxic in the water causing the fish to harm itself this way.

              But yeah, sure, hypothetically: if for a year or so you knew a wild fish that lived in an unpolluted and ecologically healthy body of water, and one day this fish chose to kill itself in front of you. You could, if you really wanted to eat a suicidal fish, eat the fish and say it was vegan because the only harm that came to the fish was through the un-coerced choices of said suicidal fish.

    • JuxtaposedJaguar@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      13 hours ago

      I mean, abstaining from animal products makes someone a vegan, right? If you abstain from AI products then it would follow that you’re an “AI vegan”.

      • JcbAzPx@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        8 hours ago

        Abstaining from animal products is just vegetarian. Veganism requires an extremely strict adherence to a very specific set of rules concerning animals.

      • normalexit@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        13 hours ago

        It follows, but it is also feels like click bait.

        A definition of vegan is:

        A vegetarian who eats plant products only, especially one who uses no products derived from animals, as fur or leather.

        There is an environmental parallel, and it made me read the article to see what they were on about – so I guess it worked.

        To be clear, I am very pro environment (I live in it); I just feel like this is crossing the streams of related, but completely different movements, isn’t particularly helpful.

  • abbiistabbii@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    90
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    17 hours ago

    Calling them after a maligned (if harmless) group seems like a choice to paint refusing to use AI as being annoying, preachy and scorn-worthy.

    They seem very determined to pressure people into using AI regardless of it’s practicality, environmental impact, or anything. Fuck this shit.

    • mostlikelyaperson@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      17 hours ago

      There’s been recent pushes in that regard, investment in AI shit has been enormous but the financial payoff for anyone besides hardware manufacturers remains nonexistent. So investors and corporations have recently redoubled their efforts into trying to get everyone to use it in the hopes that this somehow will make them profitable.

  • explodicle@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    13 hours ago

    Reading this thread, I wonder if the term is intended to divide a largely environmentalist opposition.

    Makes “nocoiner” seem tame by comparison.

    • SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      12 hours ago

      There’s a huge push right now to salvage the AI hype bubble as people realize the tech can’t live up to the promises. They are also trying to prevent regulation.

      This includes the pushes to humanize the tool, like saying it deserves rights or that there may be some kind of racism against the tool.

      • JcbAzPx@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        8 hours ago

        They’re trying to pretend it’s real AI rather than extremely complicated text prediction. Hell, the less knowledgeable among them might even believe it. LLMs are a sort of language pareidolia.