14
Scientific use on your own massive data sets(think 100s of TB) - Sure
Consumer chatbot uses - May give the illusion of positive results, whereas the long-term outcome is an overall negative affect on the user.
Give me back my Google search from 10 years ago and alright, no need for AI.
Nowadays Google is so unusable that I actually go to Claude first if I need to research something.
I'm repeating myself by saying that, AI has a place. It is just not the be-all application to everything like it is being treated.
My current list of reasons why you shouldn't use generative AI/LLMs
A) because of the environmental impacts and massive amount of water used to cool data centers https://news.mit.edu/2025/explained-generative-ai-environmental-impact-0117
B) because of the negative impacts on the health and lives of people living near data centers https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy8gy7lv448o
C) because they're plagiarism machines that are incapable of creating anything new and are often wrong https://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/does-ai-limit-our-creativity/ https://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2024/06/20/why-ai-has-a-plagiarism-problem/
D) because using them negatively affects artists and creatives and their ability to maintain their livelihoods https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2713374523000316 https://www.insideradio.com/free/media-industry-continues-reshaping-workforce-in-2025-amid-digital-shift/article_403564f7-08ce-45a1-9366-a47923cd2c09.html
E) because people who use AI show significant cognitive impairments compared to people who don't https://www.media.mit.edu/publications/your-brain-on-chatgpt/ https://time.com/7295195/ai-chatgpt-google-learning-school/
F) because using them might break your brain and drive you to psychosis https://theweek.com/tech/spiralism-ai-religion-cult-chatbot https://mental.jmir.org/2025/1/e85799 https://youtu.be/VRjgNgJms3Q
G) because Zelda Williams asked you not to https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0r0erqk18jo https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-10-07/zelda-williams-calls-out-ai-video-of-late-father-robin-williams/105863964
H) because OpenAI is helping Trump bomb schools in Iran https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/columnist/2026/03/06/openai-pentagon-tech-surveillance-us-citizens/88983682007/
I) because RAM costs have skyrocketed because OpenAI has used money it doesn't have to purchase RAM from Nvidia that currently doesn't exist to stock data centers that also don't currently exist, inconveniencing everyone for what amounts to speculative construction https://www.theverge.com/news/839353/pc-ram-shortage-pricing-spike-news
J) because Sam Altman says that his endgame is to rent knowledge back to you at a cost https://gizmodo.com/sam-altman-says-intelligence-will-be-a-utility-and-hes-just-the-man-to-collect-the-bills-2000732953
K) because some AI bro is going to totally ignore all of this and ask an LLM to write a rebuttal rather than read any of it.
Do you think local llms or community hosted ones are still as bad? Because most of those concerns seem to be more with the corporate ownership of ai, which is definitely a bad thing.
Just my personal take, but my opinion basically boils down to "they can be."
It's all about how ethically they're handled, and that can be good or bad at any scale. Take your very own instance, for example. Not that it's hosting a local LLM (maybe they are, IDK), but the instance openly supports GenAI and has instances for all the major GenAI companies/models. GenAI without ethical sourcing - which none of these companies do - is one of the most blatant examples of a corporation using technology to steal the skilled labor of workers to avoid having to pay them what they're owed for that skill. So your own instance is pro-corporatism, so long as they're benefiting from stealing from workers. Not very anarchist if you ask me.
On the other hand, there's a company that I believe partnered with Affinity a few years back that is a website design company that was hiring artists to create UI pieces for a training set for their LLM that they were going to use to create website templates for customers as part of their service (and I think they were also guaranteeing royalties for those who contributed as well?).
The instance is explicitly anti corporate ai. There's !haidra@lemmy.dbzer0.com which db0 worked on. https://aihorde.net/ is probably the most ethical image generation service.
most ethical image generation service.
oxymoron
And yet, again, the instance has communities for every single big tech genAI model. That's definitely not anti-corporate. Using those models both contributes to their shareholder value/profits and the theft of wages from workers.
And where do they get the training data for AI Horde? From scraping the web and all the freelance artists on there, like all of the big corporate models? Because then they're just justifying exploitation of workers as benefiting everybody when what they really mean is benefiting themselves.
It's like the argument pro ChatGPT airheads use constantly about how genAI "democratized" art. You know what "democratized" art and made it freely accessible to everybody? The pencil. It's just making up excuses for wanting the product of skill without putting in the effort to learn the skill or pay appropriate compensation to somebody with the skill to give you the product that you want. It's upper management thinking.
And this is why I say that it depends. Horde AI could be great - so long as the people whose work is being used to allow others access to skilled labor that they don't want to do themselves are being properly compensated for their work. Otherwise, it's no different from the corporations. Just because it's free doesn't mean that nobody is going hungry as a result of it. Unless it's trained exclusively on products from big corporations. Those artists got paid when they did the work, so nobody gets hurt there except in the theoretical sense of freelance artists potentially losing customers down the line to "good enough and cheap" genAI from people with the above upper management mindset.
And yet, again, the instance has communities for every single big tech genAI model.
Where do you see that? As far as I see, we only have comms for stable_diffusion, which is an open-weights local diffusion model. I couldn't find any corporate comms like OpenAI or Copilot or whatever. If we did, I don't know if I'd delete them tbh, since they're not explicitly against our CoC, but it would be something I'd be concerned and raise with the instance if they would be too "bootlicky". But nevertheless, we do not at the moment.
And where do they get the training data for AI Horde?
The AI Horde is using open-weight models only. We don't train them. We just use them once they've been trained.
PS: We are also anti-copyrights, so complaints based on copyright violations don't fly with us.
You know what "democratized" art and made it freely accessible to everybody? The pencil.
I often see this vacuous argument and it never convinced tbh. It assumes everyone has enough time to train on making art, which most wage-slaves undoubtedly do not. It's an inherently classist argument to assume everyone has the free time to master any artistic skill.
And this is why I say that it depends. Horde AI could be great - so long[...]
This is an argument against capitalism, not against GenAI itself. You're arguing that because capitalism is bad and exploits workers, a tool that can also be used to further exploitation needs to be opposed. But we say it's not the fault of the tool being used for exploitation, it's the fault of the system allowing exploitation. I.e. If you remove the capitalist system, this argument against GenAI is moot. And we're very much anti-capitalists in our instance. It's a similar argument against piracy as well (and we're also pro-piracy btw). I.e. sharing media is not a problem in a non-capitalist society, in fact it's a positive. It's only a negative due to capitalism.
Sorry it took so long to get back to this, as they say, "Life, uh, gets in the way."
I had to go and check the AI communities I have blocked because I could've sworn that I had multiple of different corporate GenAI blocked from DB0, but I stand corrected - I have only a handful of Stable Diffusion ones. Of course, I was also under the impression that Stable Diffusion is made by OpenAI or one of their competitors, so I blocked them instantly on that alone when I was largely blocking AI communities to clean up my homepage and to avoid the kinds of people those communities usually attract. There's a certain kind of person with a "corporate fact cat/middle manager" attitude that can plague GenAI communities that drives me crazy because they think that generating an image takes as much skill and effort (or even more) than creating one by hand.
That definitely does change my opinion on Stable Diffusion, but it still comes down to a "it depends." And as you so rightly put it, my problem is a capitalism issue, not a GenAI issue. My perspective is that not all of us are so lucky as to live in Ireland, which I believe has recently implemented a UBI specifically for artists, and so until capitalism is dealt with, any impacts of that take precedence - including those created as a consequence. Just because something is useful doesn't mean we should be dumping it as fuel on to the fire of capitalism because capitalism is what's actually burning us. Local models using images sourced with permission from the artists is a great thing. People getting paid to make things specifically to be used for training - awesome! A win in my book. In a world where artists have a guaranteed roof over their heads and food in their bellies, I do not care at all about whether or not their work is used to train AI. I bet artists can do some really cool stuff with GenAI as well - it's basically a bigger, more advanced version of the same concept that makes the Gaussian Blur tool in Photoshop work.
This is why I'm also pro-piracy when it comes to corporations - you aren't stealing from the workers, they got paid to make the thing, not when it gets sold - and why my opinion is "it depends." I'm completely willing to go ahead and change my opinion once something stops hurting workers and becomes nothing but a benefit now that it's out of the hands of the billionaires. There's an interesting conversation to be had over the...I can't think of a good word, ownership of identity maybe? Ownership of characters created to represent yourself at any rate (somebody coming along and saying "this is me" about a character you made as an avatar of yourself feels bad), and there's a country in Europe that made an interesting choice in response to deep fakes, CSAM, and revenge porn created by AI by giving every citizen the copyright to their own face, body, and voice, but that's a whole different conversation.
And this concept right here:
It assumes everyone has enough time to train on making art, which most wage-slaves undoubtedly do not. It's an inherently classist argument to assume everyone has the free time to master any artistic skill.
Has a sense of capitalistic entitlement in it. You feel that you deserve the product of art but don't respect the people who do put in the time and effort learning how to make it enough to properly compensate them for the time that they spent learning the profession. One, because they could have spent that time learning a different trade - programming, becoming an electrician or maybe an airplane mechanic or whatever - and two, because those who do art professionally almost universally talk about how they almost never have time to make art for themselves - stuff that they want to make just for them. And art (alongside the humanities) is a universally disrespected skill, with many commission based artists working for below minimum wage. It's like arguing that because you don't have the time or money to make a car, you deserve to be able to freely take cars from people's driveways and use them as a form of public transit. In an ideal world where the US isn't a car-centric hellscape and the trams always arrive on time, we wouldn't even need for everybody to have their own personal car! But we don't live in that world and hot-wiring somebody's car to take for a joyride that makes them miss work isn't cool. Just because I don't have the genetics for it or the time to train to compete in the Olympics doesn't grant me the right to free steroid injections.
And I use the word product up there very, very deliberately. Art is two things: the Product to be Consumed (and promptly discarded in this day and age of consumerism), which is what GenAI makes, and the Process, which is often what artists talk about as their favorite part of making art. But the end result - the Product - is just a small part of what Art is. Adam Savage said something along the lines of "I have no interest in AI art. One day, some college film student will do something amazing with AI - and Hollywood will milk it to death - but right now, I don't see anything in AI that I care about. Because you don't see anything of the artist in it, and that's what I care about. Their intent, what they wanted to say with the piece, what they went through in making it and what they learned along the way, none of that exists in AI art." I'm not religious, but as the saying goes: "God gave us grain but not bread so that we, too, could indulge in the joy of the act of creation." Making something allows us to better understand ourselves and the world around us. It's why people desire GenAI. To create something that only exists in their imagination. It's why Art Therapy exists. One time I heard a college student reflect that "art is how artists process the world around us" and I absolutely agree. Van Gogh died a pauper, having barely sold any of his works in his lifetime, only to become one of the most beloved painters long after his death for his loneliness and pain that he expressed in his brushwork. One thing that is guaranteed to make me cry is that scene from Dr Who where the museum curator talks about why Van Gogh is his favorite artist while Vincent breaks down crying behind him.
One thing that people caught up in the GenAI arguments often miss is that artists (any worth listening to at least) aren't gatekeeping art at all. Go watch a video on color theory, perspective, or additive and subtractive palettes. Artists love sharing information, and art is a conversation itself. I'm sure you can see it in the GenAI communities on your instance as well, people love to make things and be a part of a community with a shared passion. Artists don't care if you aren't an expert or anything, so I encourage anybody reading this to pick up a pencil, make something, and just share it with the world. I've talked to artists who say that their favorite commissioners are those who send them drawings to help interpret their vision - even if it's just doodles of stick figures on a napkin or something. There used to be a tiny subreddit called r/Mona_Leslie, and it was one of my favorite places on Reddit because the whole idea of it was to professionally critique random people's stuff as if it were in a museum gallery. People praising the brushstrokes of little kids' fingerpaint art, the line work of stick figure drawings, whatever, it was just such a great vibe. In fact, I challenge anybody who uses GenAI regularly to take an image they generated and like, bring it into an image editor, create a new layer, and just start drawing over it. You can probably make it fit your original vision even more than the AI could with enough effort. Even if you just do a half hour a couple of times a week or something, what you learn simply from doing it will expand the horizons of your creativity.
TL;DR: You're absolutely right that it's a problem with capitalism, not with GenAI itself. But until such a time as capitalism no longer creates a problem from GenAI, I am firmly in the camp of putting a leash on what can and can't be done with AI (largely on corporate AI) to minimize the harm as much as we can. Just because overfishing is a larger issue caused by capitalism doesn't mean that we shouldn't work on limiting the amount of micro plastics that end up in the ocean - especially now that supposedly something like 5-10% of the fish we eat is plastic.
Has a sense of capitalistic entitlement in it. You feel that you deserve the product of art but don't respect the people who do put in the time and effort learning how to make it enough to properly compensate them for the time that they spent learning the profession.
This is really not true at all. Me and others not having the time to learn to draw (and compose and direct and act and and and...) doesn't mean we disrespect those who do. We just want to make something to enjoy for ourselves. And yes, those who don't have the time, also (typically) don't have the money. Again, it's a classist argument to claim that everyone has either the time to learn, or the money to commission.
Likewise, it's infuriating to see privileged takes of "oh just spend a few hours here and there". Motherfucker, there's people who do not have a few hours here and there. There's people who work 2 jobs, who raise children alone, who are primary caregivers for others. They're not taking anything from artists by generating an image they like in the 1 minute they have available.
I am of the opinion of, let people enjoy things that bring them joy. I have no issue with GenAI if it's for strictly non-commercial personal use, especially when it's using open-weight local models who've already been trained. I do think that GenAI work should not be able to be monetized at all, but I don't make the rules. But people moralizing against random enthusiasts because "just learn to draw bruv" is never going to convince anyone or achieve anything. However convincing people to not support massive corpos will.
i use it like a search engine or example generator
i don't trust anything it creates just like i don't trust anything on the internet without validating it
i take you point about being wasteful tho, AI is like the oil of computing; incredibly wasteful for what it does
load more comments
(1 replies)
For sure. You could absolutely create and train a model ethically. It wouldn’t be nearly as useful in many aspects, but it would be gen AI. From an environmental perspective, I guess you could ask yourself the same thing of CPU intensive gaming. People play games for hours using up similar, often more, electricity as a small locally run LLM.
No. I want to talk to a living machine mind, not a complexified chatbot controlled entirely by ultrarich techbro overlords.
Would an upscaler be considered generative? Really all I can think of, but I do believe calling those generative is also a little bit of a stretch using the basic idea of "generation" extremely loosely.
Oh, and helping find new chemicals for medicine and other medical research. Of all the things that might benefit from "throwing everything at a wall and seeing what sticks," that's the only real good use it could be.
never, almost everyone who uses it become kinda lazy themselves, and they always keep referring to "chatgpt as an answer to your question"
Modern vocaloid is generative AI and I think making a song with Hatsune Miku is justifiable.
Vocaloid is a synthesizer, not AI.
LLM's have their use, there is no doubt about that. I'm in the middle of creating a home brew campaign for my D&D group and unfortunately I'm a lousy artist and I wanted a few things visualized. Well, I used a photo generating AI to create something that had the visual I wanted. I'm going to use it for my campaign and it will probably just sit on my hard drive after I'm done.
My employer is rolling out AI and is asking us to find places to insert it into our workflows. I am doing that with my team, but none of us are really sure if it will be of any benefit.
The problem right now is we're at the stage where idiots are convinced it is something that it is not and they have literally thrown 10's of billions of dollars at it. Now... They are staring at the wide abyss that is the amount of money they invested vs the amount of money people are willing to pay for it.
I've seen arguments for and against the presence of an AI bubble... Personally, I think it's a bubble that's so large that it will take down several long established computer industry manufacturers when if pops. Those that are arguing its absence probably have large investments that they do not want to see fail.
I think it's gonna fall on its face
You can waste its time on useless crap, increasing the cost, which, while an environmental disaster, hastens the inevitable crash.
You do realize that counts as "engagement" which AI companies then use to turn around and get more investor money?
Either use it for actual work or don't use it at all.
The best use of AI I've seen thus far is reading legislative bills. Those monstrosities are so fucking long and filled with earmarks that it's next to impossible to understand what is in them.
Having an AI not only read the bill but keep a watch of it as it goes through Congress is probably the best use of AI because it actually helps citizens.
I am on record saying we need an AI that can track prices of various things that can then predict when the best time it is to buy something.
I want an AI bot that saves me money or gets me a good deal or extracts money from the capital class.
It's as useful as a rubber duck. Decent at bouncing ideas off it when no one is available, or you can't be bothered to bother people about dumb ideas.
But at the moment, no, it's not justifiable as it directly fuels oligarchies, fascism in the US, and tech bros. Perhaps when the bubble pops.
load more comments
(6 replies)
It speeds up my dev time dramatically. I know what I want to do, I have an idea of how I want to do it. LLM generates boilerplate code I review. I tweak it. I fix the bug. If there is something I don't understand, I ask sources to review the output. I test it. Then I'll submit it for peer review once I'm happy with the code and the output.
If it truly helps you, I think that might be enough for me. I say truly because you need to use an AI with responsibility to not ruin yourself. Like, don't let it think for you. Don't trust everything it says.
I use it a lot when applying for jobs, something I've struggled with on and off for 12 years. I suck and writing the cover letter and CV. It takes me 2-3 days to update a cover letter for a job because it takes so much energy. With AI that is down to 1-2 days.
It's also great for explaning things in other words of if you're trying to look up something that's hard to search for, I don't have any examples tho.
I used to use it to help me formulate scentences since english isn't my first language. Now I instead use Kagi Translate.
It's not going away. The cat is out of the bag.
As with any tool it has its use cases. It's not a good fit for everything. You can drive a screw with a hammer but a screwdriver works best.
We're experiencing the capitalist euphoria that happens when something new comes along. This needs to get regulated into submission like all the previous bubbles.
I think its great for inspiration but your final product should never be raw AI/LLM output
In its current state, no... Saying its terrible for the environment and wider economy is an understatement, and the tech industry is so desperate to recoup their money on AI that they've allowed it to work its way into everything - often enshittifying things in the process.
When this bubble eventually reaches its limit and bursts, I imagine these AI tools will be forced to recede into their actually useful and profitable niches - and that's when they'll start being justifiable to me at least.
Using ai is worse for you than smoking
Ofcourse, but I know better to not even bother trying to have a civil discussion about it here.
Medicine.
Evidence shows that some highly specialised models are better at things like detecting breast cancer in scans than human doctors.
Properly anonymised automatic second scans by an AI to catch the markers that human doctors miss for another review by a specialist is an excellent potential use case for an LLM AI.
Transcription services can save doctors huge amounts of admin time and allows them to focus on the patient if they know there's a reliable system in place for typing up notes for a consultation. As long as it's treated as a "please review these notes are accurate" rather than treated as a gospel recording and the data is destroyed once it's job is complete and the patient has been able to give informed consent.
The way these things are being used in actual medical contexts right now is frankly terrifying.
I had a colonoscopy last year (such fun!) and there was an 'AI' monitoring the camera feed to detect anomalies. If it spotted something it just drew the doctor's attention to it for his expert, human review. I was ok with that. Effectively an extra pair of eyes that can look everywhere on the screen all at once and never blink.
Yeah the sciences in general I'd say. There's a project aiming to translate the tens of thousands of cuneiform clay tablets that sit in storage all because there's like a handful of people in the world that can read them- AI is an amazing way to mass translate them and unlocking vast troves of hitherto completely unknown ancient knowledge.
The problem is not even the AI, but the scientists themselves who guard the tablets jealously because they don't want anyone else to translate "their" tablets that they dug up, even though they are incapable of possibly make a dent in the sheer volume in their collected lifetimes.
Imagine, so much information encoded, from thousands of years ago that could reveal so much about the origins of our culture and civilization!
-
The sciences obviously
-
For me personally, data collation
-
Learning
-
Assisting with Linux sysadmin stuff (used to be a "how do I X" meant hours of scouring online forums and asking questions that might be deleted because draconian forum rules or get answered weeks later if at all, now I can get shit done in minutes)
5. I also use it a lot to explore ideas and arguments, like a sort of metaphysical sparring partner.
I work in the UK public sector and often have to respond to complaints from people who have written a 4 page rant without any punctuation.
Copilot is amazing for taking that 4 page long rant and reducing it down to something I can actually respond to.
I don't use copilot for drafting the reply, I do that myself. But I'll use copilot as a proof reading tool.
As far as I'm concerned I'm responsible for creating content and the AI helps tweak it
Don't use AI as a proofreading tool. Proofreading should be done by humans.
No, never.
Mostly because it's illegally trained, a fact that is very often just overlooked. Because you know, there are no other easy options. Don't let them keep sticking to different rules.
It's not ready for commercial use by the general public.
We see this ALL the time in America - a new disruptive technology emerges. We jump all over the benefits and the profits without regard to consequences or expense. We suffer.
New cheap pesticide? Hell yeah, spray that DDT everywhere, it's super effective! (Insert other endless examples here, from microplastics to asbestos.)
AI (and information technology in general) has shown itself to be a danger to human beings. Its effects are not felt so much in the short term (5 or 10 years) but generationally. We've seen that information technology has already impacted quality of life. It's used as spyware, as a tool to collect and correlate massive amounts of data. It's used to shape our media experience, our purchasing, our social circles. There are great things, like online banking. But they seem more and more to be outweighed by a loss of humanity. So much misinformation that I question my own reality some days.
What we call "AI" is the evolution of these obtrusive, coercive practices. It exists purely to replace human thinking skills. I've spent a bit of time in r/teachers over the last 15 years, and the stories keep getting worse. The rise of AI means that detecting plagiarism/cheating is exponentially more difficult. But, more importantly, the kids don't have any stress when it comes to cheating. They don't have to find a friend or know the bare minimum. They can just...cheat. And they never learn to problem solve or overcome adversity.
None of this matters, though. Ready or not, here we are. A new kind of slavery for a new world order.
You raise many good points, but social media also has benefits and is not all just negative. Same with AI and all tech. We are better off overall with tech despite the downsides which we should be doing a better job of mitigating.
despite the downsides which we should be doing a better job of mitigating.
This is the part where I lose faith. We have failed to mitigate the downsides. In fact, we have encouraged the monetization of the downsides.
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2026
14 points (93.8% liked)
Ask Lemmy
39971 readers
291 users here now
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, toxicity and dog-whistling are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS