249
all 21 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] slurpinderpin@lemmy.world 65 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Duh. As these models get better they’ll become more widely used by enterprises to save costs. That’s why these tech companies spent so much developing them… to sell them. The solution isn’t banning AI btw, it’s providing UBI to those most affected

[-] subignition@fedia.io 29 points 2 years ago

If you're providing it to only some people, it's not very universal now is it

[-] slurpinderpin@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

Providing income universally to those most affected. It’ll never happen anyways though let’s be real. Look at our current politics.

[-] gray@pawb.social 2 points 2 years ago

Unemployment already exists?

[-] QuantumSoul@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 years ago
[-] RozhkiNozhki@lemmy.world 18 points 2 years ago

Universal basic income

[-] Lanusensei87@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago

Universal Basic Income

[-] nieceandtows@programming.dev 4 points 2 years ago

Universal basic income

[-] Eheran@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago
[-] pirat@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago
[-] Fredselfish@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

They not going sell them, but lease them.

[-] HeadfullofSoup@kbin.earth 5 points 2 years ago

Making everyone using them on a subscription model then when AI replace nearly everyone so company are stuck with AI jack the price as high as possible for ever and ever and ever

[-] slurpinderpin@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

Tomato tomato. They use them for sales and revenue

[-] phoneymouse@lemmy.world 38 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

The same NY Times suing Open AI for copyright infringement. Rules for thee, but not for me.

If the NY Times’ case has any merit, then the art generated by AI is also based on copyright infringing models.

[-] General_Effort@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago

The winners of a system don't have an incentive to undermine the rules. Quite the opposite. The NYT wants these rules because it would benefit from them. There are at least 2 image generators that adhere to capitalist ethics. I don't know what Claro uses, but I see no indication that they are being uppity.

[-] slurpinderpin@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

Damn, good point, forgot about their lawsuit

[-] Zarxrax@lemmy.world 21 points 2 years ago

Per the software website (which the article links to), I don't see any mention of generative AI. Their "ai image intelligence" only makes mention of tagging images for SEO. https://www.pixometry.com/en/publishing/ai-image-intelligence/

[-] Jordan117@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago

Yeah, it's basically a smart photo filter for color-correction, object cut-outs, masking, etc:

https://www.pixometry.com/en/pixometry-the-new-name-for-elpical-software/elpical-claro-pixometry/

This feels more like consolidating positions in an art department post-Photoshop because you don't need photo editors to dodge and burn physical negatives in a darkroom any more.

[-] vegeta@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago

They are just practicing using AI to help out with the workload

this post was submitted on 14 Jun 2024
249 points (96.6% liked)

Technology

77347 readers
519 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS