Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   tante (tante@tldr.nettime.org)'s status on Tuesday, 31-Oct-2023 17:44:45 JST tante

   • Meredith Whittaker

   I really like @Mer__edith's point here, very well put.

   But I think there's something missing: She argues from an output perspective and in that she is right. "Generative AI" produces "plausible" text and "passable though somewhat off" imagery so these systems are not that useful in serious contexts. 100%

   But these systems are massively useful to undermine labor. To burden a decreasing amount of employees with the work of fixing the output of these systems (probably for bad pay because "you are just fixing it a bit"). And to repeat the last automation cycles of producing a lot more stuff for a lot less cost per unit which only works by reducing quality.

   You know how bad fast fashion is quality-wise? That is what "generative AI" does to text, image, media. But that fact that fast fashion is bad doesn't stop it because the cost argument wins. And that is what "generative AI" is useful for.

   "Useful" is a word that only makes sense when adding for *whom* and for *what purposes and goals*.

   https://mastodon.social/@hagen/111328641537069348

   • Embed this notice
     pettter (pettter@mastodon.acc.umu.se)'s status on Tuesday, 31-Oct-2023 17:47:58 JST pettter

     in reply to

     • Meredith Whittaker

     @tante @Mer__edith IIRC she's made that point in other contexts.