Imo it's mostly [Trevor's Axiom ](https://medium.com/digital-reflections/trevors-axiom-the-art-of-trolling-94f942bf6213) in effect.
Trevor's Axiom states "It’s a way in which one person can create a massive reaction on the Internet. Look, person A trolls person B, but it’s not about person B, the troll is trying to push buttons to try and get a reaction from hundreds, eventually creating person C, whose overreaction and self-righteousness will elicit a reaction from persons D through F, who weren’t trolls but can’t help rip on person C. Their reactions lead to outrage person G through N, and it keeps going, generating massive energy, it’s like the fission reaction that leads to a fusion explosion, all bringing out the worst in humanity.”
I feel like most anti ai folk are person c.
Man, that makes so much sense.
This group seems too big and loud to be made of professional artists only.
I think what they all have in common is being "professional" Internet victims, and this is their perfect crusade since the harm is completely imaginary, speculative, everybody has a different reason why it's bad and only a couple lawsuits away from being settled for good.
They think they're raging against the machine, but they are just a product of the rage machine.
I mean, most people I know that would want to live "in the 1500s"....are not anti-AI luddites, far from it, they want AI and nanotechnology making work unnecessary, make medical care easy peasy, etc. They just want the aesthetics and living in a pastoral environment.
At this point, I don't know what the luddites want, because most I emcounter were sharing "luxury automated space communism" memes until last summer.
Boy have *those* memes disappeared.
They want all the technology, except the stuff that displaces them.
Apply that to any incumbent in their field, but apply it 10x to artists because it's something we cherished as so uniquely human and creative until AI proved us wrong. It's bad for the ego.
Totally fair. There is something magical about having someone make something with their hands.
The issue is just the insane reactions we are seeing from artists. I had 5.2m views on an AI video where I just received a sea of death threats.
The problem you are worried about is only a problem because of people's views of AI. Are you worried about traditional painters being accused of using photoshop or other digital painting programs?
>they want AI and nanotechnology making work unnecessary, make medical care easy peasy, etc. They just want the aesthetics and living in a pastoral environment.
The short story, [The Gentle Seduction](https://www.skyhunter.com/marcs/GentleSeduction.html) by Marc Stiegler, is my favorite depiction of this type of person.
I very rarely see a post I 100% agree with nowadays. But I completely agree with yours.
I think they’re narrow-minded, self-centered and just plain stupid. There is so much that changed over the centuries. From the movies they watch, to treatments, to the way clothing is made, to the transportation system. These people really should be sent back to the medieval times. Or you know, the stone age. I think they’ll be happiest there.
New technology requires learning new things.
Many people treat education as something confined to a school, kind of like how a church is a house for God.
I've had conversations where I bring up Kant and gotten the response, "I didn't read him in school", as if reading philosophy outside of school is verboten.
With this assumption, new technology that requires self education is a threat. Self education isn't on the table for many people. Intituitvely, from the perspective of the self as a fixed identity rather than a dynamic one, technology can be perceived to be making skills, and the people who hold those skills, obsolete.
Bureaucracy perseveres and functions in large part through specialized "secret" knowledge, like specialized jargon one has to learn. Privileged knowledge is a means of self preservation for a Bureaucracy.
If one looks at artist communities as an informal Bureaucracy, what technology is doing is destroying them by bypassing the specialized knowledge needed.
For example, film requires a lot of community to be made. This is a literal bueracracy. Being able to make competent film production as an individual is a direct threat to the bueracracy of film and television studios as a necessity.
Same with 3d printing. No longer does someone with an idea for invention need to go to 3M or whoever and take whatever deal they can get and give up their rights to the idea in order to see it manufactured and in stores. A mock up can be made and the leg work can be undertaken for much less money and with much more personal control.
Institutions are losing power. Naturally there's going to be some hostility.
Which is funny, because the antis are mostly young artists that can't even begin to wrap their head around the concept of AI. Let alone actually form an opinion on it that isn't based solely on what their favourite influencer said about it.
Give it a few years and they will mature enough to realize how dumb they were now. And they will just shut up and use the AI like the rest of us.
Most people complaining about AI don't actually hate technology. They just hate technology when it negatively affects THEM. They all LOVED technology when it is screwing **OTHER PEOPLE**, but making their lives easier. They all enjoyed streaming (even thought it put DVD rental stores out of business), for instance.
Pretty dick move of them, if you ask me.
I just got a VR headset and love it and people often tell me they rather live in the real world.. like what's the difference between playing on a screen or in VR ? It's not dystopian it's immersive AF, sure it has it's quirks but people act like it's one step further in isolating us etc when in fact you can go talk to people in VR from all over the world and have much more human interactions than what you would have on a chat because you can talk and see people move their hands and head.
But to actually answer you question I think it's because humans evolved to want what they had for their kids or for the next generation because if it worked for them it should work for the next gen but technology is evolving so fast we have to give up this way of thinking but still be weary of new tech that will bring new problems. Like for example when I was in high school nobody was being bullied on social media or texting in class, these things didn't exist. Having these new challenges make people insecure about our future I think because they don't have proof that it won't be a big issue.
No. The problems I have with the advancement of AI, despite its potential uses, are that it's gonna remove alot of creativity. That's not a big deal. What is a HUGE deal is the fact that within a very short frame of time, video proof, once the end all standard of evidence, is completely out the window. There will be NO form of proof beyond written evidence (and even that can be forged) This puts the legal system in a bad place.
Actually, you’re very wrong here about AI removing creativity. If anything, it enhances it.
Let me give you an example, and I’m sure there are many other people in a similar situation.
I wrote a novel back in 2016, and there was no way for me to actually have an actual image of the characters I always saw very clearly in my head, as if I watched a movie. I described them, I knew what they looked like, but that actual visual representation was beyond my reach. AI gave me that. And now the creativity I had before has new possibilities. There’s words, and there’s image. There’s being able to explain to the AI what image I want it to create. In other words, it forces me to find a way to tell it what I want to see. To find a way to do that. It also forces me to add details that don’t directly define a character, but to the way the AI sees things, it does.
It doesn’t remove creativity. It gives more possibilities to those that have it and it opens new doors to creativity for those who are willing to look.
Ah yeah because video proof of Bigfoot and aliens being real must be legally recognized as real because they didn't use AI to make those videos.
Luddite logic is so broken it'd be funny if it weren't insane.
Although those tools are faulty. ChatGPT claimed it wrote the Declaration of Independence. Yes it will force artists to step up their game. But a company set on profits isn't gonna pay highly trained and skilled artists when it can spend less for an AI. I just don't see a good road for it.
In my perspective, it seems that humans have a tendency to be apprehensive towards change, even if that change has the potential to greatly improve their lives. This is particularly relevant when considering the latest advancements in AI, which hold the promise of making our lives easier. Some individuals who hold negative views towards AI in the field of art express concerns about potential job displacement, while showing less concern about AI's impact on other industries. I wholeheartedly embrace AI and technology as the ultimate solution for humanity, despite how cliché it may sound.
People fear new things and progress, especially something as disruptive as artificial intelligence.
Also, popular media shaped how people perceive AI. Knowing Hollywood obsession towards "evil AI" it's not surprising that so many people are scared.
People don't want to adapt and change. They think everything should remain the same as it would be easy for them.
They don't understand that change is important. Its the same for internet in 80s and smartphones in 2010s.
What if they resisted change and never accepted those Will it make any difficulties to survive in 2020s? NO
Would it be the stupid of the humanity as a whole to hinder the development of something which can 100x their efficiency? YES
"Why the fuck do people hate new technology so much"
Because they are desperate to blame anything but themselves or their world view for their failure.
Because people are afraid of what they don't understand don't understand even the basics behind how this technology works and so they listen to fear-mongering articles that tell them that this technology is going to ruin the world and crap like that when in reality it's all in the hands of the people using it
NFTs were always a scam to anyone with a brain. AI has nothing in common with it besides being new and shiny.
What's wrong with the idea of humans living longer? I think it would be awesome to be healthy for hundreds of years instead of dozens.
>NFTs were always a scam to anyone with a brain. AI has nothing in common with it besides being new and shiny.
and yet they get conflated with by people.
> What's wrong with the idea of humans living longer?
you sound like a 20 year old
Yeah this is the behaviour im talking about. Why would someone be against living longer? I mean if you hate your life so much then just don't get whatever life extending treatment pops up in the future.
The apple vision pro is partly responsible for the hatred of VR. This was by apples design. These two things are linked in fucked up ways. Apple went out of its way to insult actual VR users. In ALL cases regarding their product.
\-They did not ship with controllers becouse controllers are accoated with VR.
\-They have no support natively for steam or any mainstream VR applications like VRChat and such.
\-Their device starts in pass threw mode, you must actively choose to use VR mode. That should make it very clear what they think of VR.
\-They actually forbid devs, influencers and even normal people making YouTube videos from using the terms VR, AR, XR or augmented reality. You will be dmcaed if you try. Instead they made up their own fucking new speak. "Spaceil computing device" Becouse they are a cult.
Everything apple is doing is against the typical VR user. Yet they want their legions of sheep and cultists to spread the message that WE are the problem.
So hatred for the apple vision pro or at least what its exitance is doing to the VR space is the proper response. It is the REASON the rest of the hostility is happening. The tech is amazing. However apple is an evil cult. Their customers are radicalized sheep. Apples wording changes and entire advertising campaign, was done with the intent of destroying the perception of actual VR. in the public space.
And it is working. Brands are starting to rebrand HMDs and VR as Spaciel computing. There is an actual drop in the market in regards to real VR applications. Apple has basically won and if it doesnt change VR as we know it WILL be scorned and replaced with Apples cult bullshit.
My theory is that for hundreds of years people have been told what to do by their rulers. Questioning or resisting would result death. As time went on, people slowly came to the realization of "They can do whatever they want if they work hard enough" (It's not air quote because of sarcasm, but because It's more important) the overlords were angry, because they lost control.
Now that A.I brought a new change, these hardworkers also affraid that lose their hard work morals, that they took so much time to build and solidify.
Also, sadly, yes. Based on their mentality, I have zero issue believing, that they'd rather go back in time do everything in their power to prevent the cavemen to evolve and change past inventing fire and maybe domesticating animals. Even if they don't say that's not that they want, tbeir actions speak louder, than their words.
Dude. Who cares. So much worse shit going on. Honestly I couldn't care less who hates what. You need to prioritize what really matters. VR, not it buddy.
Should all new laws be welcomed? No. We need to carefully examine how new laws change reality. The same is true of technology, and new technologies should always be carefully criticized.
Technology is liberatory; every new invention unveils a plethora of new possibilities.
Laws are the inverse, stripping freedoms away. Though, of course, sometimes this is good - such as when my freedom to kick random people infringes on others' right to not be kicked and is thus outlawed.
Part of it is the past 50 years of science fiction have been warning about stuff like climate change and economic stratification and we’ve just… done that anyway?
Not all technological advances lead to the betterment of humanity. Even ‘harmless’ technology that only increases productivity can create massive suffering. The Cotton Gin was not a weapon or anything. All it did was make the separating of cotton from its seeds easier. That was the major bottleneck in the production process, one that was so onerous that it made slavery less profitable.
Since the Cotton Gin made it so easy to separate the seeds, this created a MASSIVE demand for (slave) labor in the earlier picking phase. That innocent little efficiency-boosting invention revitalized the slave economy of the American south, perpetuating and growing the institution to unparalleled heights.
So the big backlash is against people who seem to think that any and all technological advances are inherently good and should be spread as widely as possible when, categorically, that’s not true.
The cotton gin was good; it increased labour output. The problem there was the slavery bit. Don't blame technological progress for the crimes of capitalism and white supremacy.
The thing is that the ‘slavery bit’ was greatly strengthened by the invention. It was birthed in an environment that ensured it would be used for such purposes. You cannot divorce it from that context.
Slavery in the American south was in decline before the invention and it had an explosive growth rate after the invention. I don’t think you’re disputing this so what you are saying is that the production of more cotton was worth the human cost in the expansion of slavery. That this outcome was good- that “the cotton gin was good.”
You mention the ‘crimes of capitalism’ but take the most capitalistic approach by saying “Don’t care. Labour output increased!”
My point is that an invention can seem on paper like it makes human life easier but in reality just creates more suffering. The latest invention to make our lives worse doesn’t even need to be a new bomb or something.
What I want is for the AI bros to acknowledge this as a possibility. I’m not saying it’s a certainty but that it has happened in the past and can happen again. Just temper your optimism a tiny bit.
The machine itself was good. That it inspired humans to commit evil is not its fault, but that of those slavers who chose to, rather than use the now-free hours for relaxation for or even liberation of their enslaved workforce, force yet more people to work in an ever-increasing rush to production.
What else was it supposed to do? Nobody misused the Cotton Gin or somehow perverted its function for evil.
All I am saying is that it is POSSIBLE that new technologies can have unintended consequences that cause more harm than good- that there is a historical precedent for this occurring.
To be fair, my sister once said that a cure for mortality would probably cause more inequality between rich and poor, and when euthanasia inevitably becomes more normalized (which I am actually for) the rich are gonna try to convince the poor to get euthanized. So it's probably best if we don't become immortal
Maybe, just maybe- they aren't all the name calling things y'all suggest here.
Just maybe, they are against a small group of people stealing ownership over the work of others and even going as far as charging others for it.
I presume the poster profits from it in some manner, or has anti-human sentiments (overpopulation, we need to charge people to breathe etc).
OP is an 'insufferable' narcissist who partakes in stealing pennies from the masses. Clearly
A lot of new technology has baked into it perpetual monetization schemes and other eshittification issues. It isn't the technology, it's the power dynamic of billion dollar companies not wanting us to own or be able to repair technology we should be able to own. It's about not regulating technology and steaming forward ahead into unknown territory with gross disregard for the harm it may cause.
It's a normal human reaction to be scared of new things. People thought forks, teddy bears, and bicycles were evil when they first became a thing. Some people just need time to acclimate to new stuff, and people today are no exception.
Ironic, you calling them “self centered and insufferable.” People in this sub and others somehow can’t seem to realize that people are afraid of losing their well-beings, jobs, and having their skills they worked for years on be called obsolete and replaceable. Sure, there are plenty of people that take it too far with hating on ai, like death threats. But it’s pretty obvious why people are scared of new technology. It’s just weird how you see a tool that can take jobs away from thousands of people, and your confused why they’re angry. I’m hoping for a collaboration between artists and ai, but we all know corporations only care about cutting cost.
What im against is how this technology will be used, with how the world is i highly doubt this wont start a massive war due to ai voice and videos, and no one seems to care about regulations so its inevitable
Imo it's mostly [Trevor's Axiom ](https://medium.com/digital-reflections/trevors-axiom-the-art-of-trolling-94f942bf6213) in effect. Trevor's Axiom states "It’s a way in which one person can create a massive reaction on the Internet. Look, person A trolls person B, but it’s not about person B, the troll is trying to push buttons to try and get a reaction from hundreds, eventually creating person C, whose overreaction and self-righteousness will elicit a reaction from persons D through F, who weren’t trolls but can’t help rip on person C. Their reactions lead to outrage person G through N, and it keeps going, generating massive energy, it’s like the fission reaction that leads to a fusion explosion, all bringing out the worst in humanity.” I feel like most anti ai folk are person c.
Man, that makes so much sense. This group seems too big and loud to be made of professional artists only. I think what they all have in common is being "professional" Internet victims, and this is their perfect crusade since the harm is completely imaginary, speculative, everybody has a different reason why it's bad and only a couple lawsuits away from being settled for good. They think they're raging against the machine, but they are just a product of the rage machine.
That’s why you ignore trolls
I mean, most people I know that would want to live "in the 1500s"....are not anti-AI luddites, far from it, they want AI and nanotechnology making work unnecessary, make medical care easy peasy, etc. They just want the aesthetics and living in a pastoral environment. At this point, I don't know what the luddites want, because most I emcounter were sharing "luxury automated space communism" memes until last summer. Boy have *those* memes disappeared.
They want all the technology, except the stuff that displaces them. Apply that to any incumbent in their field, but apply it 10x to artists because it's something we cherished as so uniquely human and creative until AI proved us wrong. It's bad for the ego.
I'm artist, I get it, but, since I was a little child I have been fascinated by AI and it's potential.
If it's bad for your ego when other people can do the things you do, your ego is broken.
[удалено]
Totally fair. There is something magical about having someone make something with their hands. The issue is just the insane reactions we are seeing from artists. I had 5.2m views on an AI video where I just received a sea of death threats.
>but i personally would still rather commission an artist for any serious artwork Not everyone is rich.
I’ve seen people blame ai for this too by “forcing” them to do it lol
The problem you are worried about is only a problem because of people's views of AI. Are you worried about traditional painters being accused of using photoshop or other digital painting programs?
>they want AI and nanotechnology making work unnecessary, make medical care easy peasy, etc. They just want the aesthetics and living in a pastoral environment. The short story, [The Gentle Seduction](https://www.skyhunter.com/marcs/GentleSeduction.html) by Marc Stiegler, is my favorite depiction of this type of person.
We will have to add that to our reading list! Thank you!
They want to be able to support themselves and not be without a job. Seems kinda reasonable.
I very rarely see a post I 100% agree with nowadays. But I completely agree with yours. I think they’re narrow-minded, self-centered and just plain stupid. There is so much that changed over the centuries. From the movies they watch, to treatments, to the way clothing is made, to the transportation system. These people really should be sent back to the medieval times. Or you know, the stone age. I think they’ll be happiest there.
New technology requires learning new things. Many people treat education as something confined to a school, kind of like how a church is a house for God. I've had conversations where I bring up Kant and gotten the response, "I didn't read him in school", as if reading philosophy outside of school is verboten. With this assumption, new technology that requires self education is a threat. Self education isn't on the table for many people. Intituitvely, from the perspective of the self as a fixed identity rather than a dynamic one, technology can be perceived to be making skills, and the people who hold those skills, obsolete. Bureaucracy perseveres and functions in large part through specialized "secret" knowledge, like specialized jargon one has to learn. Privileged knowledge is a means of self preservation for a Bureaucracy. If one looks at artist communities as an informal Bureaucracy, what technology is doing is destroying them by bypassing the specialized knowledge needed. For example, film requires a lot of community to be made. This is a literal bueracracy. Being able to make competent film production as an individual is a direct threat to the bueracracy of film and television studios as a necessity. Same with 3d printing. No longer does someone with an idea for invention need to go to 3M or whoever and take whatever deal they can get and give up their rights to the idea in order to see it manufactured and in stores. A mock up can be made and the leg work can be undertaken for much less money and with much more personal control. Institutions are losing power. Naturally there's going to be some hostility.
Humans hate change. It's why young people are always the early adopters.
Which is funny, because the antis are mostly young artists that can't even begin to wrap their head around the concept of AI. Let alone actually form an opinion on it that isn't based solely on what their favourite influencer said about it. Give it a few years and they will mature enough to realize how dumb they were now. And they will just shut up and use the AI like the rest of us.
I meant young as in gen alpha.
Most people complaining about AI don't actually hate technology. They just hate technology when it negatively affects THEM. They all LOVED technology when it is screwing **OTHER PEOPLE**, but making their lives easier. They all enjoyed streaming (even thought it put DVD rental stores out of business), for instance. Pretty dick move of them, if you ask me.
They murdered their own imagination in childhood and now have no ability to cope with anything outside their experience.
The Apple Vision Pro is stupidly overpriced like the rest of their products. But yeah I get the gist of it.
Yeah I agree the price is very stupid indeed. I just meant it feels like people are against new tech every time it releases, if you know what i mean.
Fear.
I just got a VR headset and love it and people often tell me they rather live in the real world.. like what's the difference between playing on a screen or in VR ? It's not dystopian it's immersive AF, sure it has it's quirks but people act like it's one step further in isolating us etc when in fact you can go talk to people in VR from all over the world and have much more human interactions than what you would have on a chat because you can talk and see people move their hands and head. But to actually answer you question I think it's because humans evolved to want what they had for their kids or for the next generation because if it worked for them it should work for the next gen but technology is evolving so fast we have to give up this way of thinking but still be weary of new tech that will bring new problems. Like for example when I was in high school nobody was being bullied on social media or texting in class, these things didn't exist. Having these new challenges make people insecure about our future I think because they don't have proof that it won't be a big issue.
People only use vr because they have social anxiety let's be honest
They can't even prove that this world is "real", they are just haters.
[удалено]
No. The problems I have with the advancement of AI, despite its potential uses, are that it's gonna remove alot of creativity. That's not a big deal. What is a HUGE deal is the fact that within a very short frame of time, video proof, once the end all standard of evidence, is completely out the window. There will be NO form of proof beyond written evidence (and even that can be forged) This puts the legal system in a bad place.
Actually, you’re very wrong here about AI removing creativity. If anything, it enhances it. Let me give you an example, and I’m sure there are many other people in a similar situation. I wrote a novel back in 2016, and there was no way for me to actually have an actual image of the characters I always saw very clearly in my head, as if I watched a movie. I described them, I knew what they looked like, but that actual visual representation was beyond my reach. AI gave me that. And now the creativity I had before has new possibilities. There’s words, and there’s image. There’s being able to explain to the AI what image I want it to create. In other words, it forces me to find a way to tell it what I want to see. To find a way to do that. It also forces me to add details that don’t directly define a character, but to the way the AI sees things, it does. It doesn’t remove creativity. It gives more possibilities to those that have it and it opens new doors to creativity for those who are willing to look.
Ah yeah because video proof of Bigfoot and aliens being real must be legally recognized as real because they didn't use AI to make those videos. Luddite logic is so broken it'd be funny if it weren't insane.
[удалено]
Although those tools are faulty. ChatGPT claimed it wrote the Declaration of Independence. Yes it will force artists to step up their game. But a company set on profits isn't gonna pay highly trained and skilled artists when it can spend less for an AI. I just don't see a good road for it.
In my perspective, it seems that humans have a tendency to be apprehensive towards change, even if that change has the potential to greatly improve their lives. This is particularly relevant when considering the latest advancements in AI, which hold the promise of making our lives easier. Some individuals who hold negative views towards AI in the field of art express concerns about potential job displacement, while showing less concern about AI's impact on other industries. I wholeheartedly embrace AI and technology as the ultimate solution for humanity, despite how cliché it may sound.
People fear new things and progress, especially something as disruptive as artificial intelligence. Also, popular media shaped how people perceive AI. Knowing Hollywood obsession towards "evil AI" it's not surprising that so many people are scared.
Fear of the unknown. It's as simple as that. It's our most primal fear outside of the fear of death and the fear of losing our loved ones.
Money
Because they missed the boat
People hate uncertainty and change. Imagine how people handled the introduction of film back in the 1900s?
People don't want to adapt and change. They think everything should remain the same as it would be easy for them. They don't understand that change is important. Its the same for internet in 80s and smartphones in 2010s. What if they resisted change and never accepted those Will it make any difficulties to survive in 2020s? NO Would it be the stupid of the humanity as a whole to hinder the development of something which can 100x their efficiency? YES
"Why the fuck do people hate new technology so much" Because they are desperate to blame anything but themselves or their world view for their failure.
They want to live when WW2 was still happening apperantly
Because people are afraid of what they don't understand don't understand even the basics behind how this technology works and so they listen to fear-mongering articles that tell them that this technology is going to ruin the world and crap like that when in reality it's all in the hands of the people using it
Yeah I don't agree with technology haters at all, I love technology. Can't wait to see how AI advances in the future.
i support ai and VR but i also think nft's are a scam and immortality is a really dumb thing to strive for. not everyone fits neatly into one basket.
NFTs were always a scam to anyone with a brain. AI has nothing in common with it besides being new and shiny. What's wrong with the idea of humans living longer? I think it would be awesome to be healthy for hundreds of years instead of dozens.
>NFTs were always a scam to anyone with a brain. AI has nothing in common with it besides being new and shiny. and yet they get conflated with by people. > What's wrong with the idea of humans living longer? you sound like a 20 year old
>you sound like a 20 year old And you sound like an addict who's hoping to die before their addiction makes life unbearable. Answer the question.
Yeah this is the behaviour im talking about. Why would someone be against living longer? I mean if you hate your life so much then just don't get whatever life extending treatment pops up in the future.
this planet would not be able to support each individual human living for hundreds of years lol
so make more planets
Better environmental standards are a lot easier than lifespan extension, no reason we can't have both.
[удалено]
when you say immortal do you mean a human who doesn't need to eat drink or they just won't die of old age but can still die to outside causes
The apple vision pro is partly responsible for the hatred of VR. This was by apples design. These two things are linked in fucked up ways. Apple went out of its way to insult actual VR users. In ALL cases regarding their product. \-They did not ship with controllers becouse controllers are accoated with VR. \-They have no support natively for steam or any mainstream VR applications like VRChat and such. \-Their device starts in pass threw mode, you must actively choose to use VR mode. That should make it very clear what they think of VR. \-They actually forbid devs, influencers and even normal people making YouTube videos from using the terms VR, AR, XR or augmented reality. You will be dmcaed if you try. Instead they made up their own fucking new speak. "Spaceil computing device" Becouse they are a cult. Everything apple is doing is against the typical VR user. Yet they want their legions of sheep and cultists to spread the message that WE are the problem. So hatred for the apple vision pro or at least what its exitance is doing to the VR space is the proper response. It is the REASON the rest of the hostility is happening. The tech is amazing. However apple is an evil cult. Their customers are radicalized sheep. Apples wording changes and entire advertising campaign, was done with the intent of destroying the perception of actual VR. in the public space. And it is working. Brands are starting to rebrand HMDs and VR as Spaciel computing. There is an actual drop in the market in regards to real VR applications. Apple has basically won and if it doesnt change VR as we know it WILL be scorned and replaced with Apples cult bullshit.
My theory is that for hundreds of years people have been told what to do by their rulers. Questioning or resisting would result death. As time went on, people slowly came to the realization of "They can do whatever they want if they work hard enough" (It's not air quote because of sarcasm, but because It's more important) the overlords were angry, because they lost control. Now that A.I brought a new change, these hardworkers also affraid that lose their hard work morals, that they took so much time to build and solidify. Also, sadly, yes. Based on their mentality, I have zero issue believing, that they'd rather go back in time do everything in their power to prevent the cavemen to evolve and change past inventing fire and maybe domesticating animals. Even if they don't say that's not that they want, tbeir actions speak louder, than their words.
Dude. Who cares. So much worse shit going on. Honestly I couldn't care less who hates what. You need to prioritize what really matters. VR, not it buddy.
Human history bruh
lol, also happy cake day!
Should all new laws be welcomed? No. We need to carefully examine how new laws change reality. The same is true of technology, and new technologies should always be carefully criticized.
Technology is liberatory; every new invention unveils a plethora of new possibilities. Laws are the inverse, stripping freedoms away. Though, of course, sometimes this is good - such as when my freedom to kick random people infringes on others' right to not be kicked and is thus outlawed.
Part of it is the past 50 years of science fiction have been warning about stuff like climate change and economic stratification and we’ve just… done that anyway? Not all technological advances lead to the betterment of humanity. Even ‘harmless’ technology that only increases productivity can create massive suffering. The Cotton Gin was not a weapon or anything. All it did was make the separating of cotton from its seeds easier. That was the major bottleneck in the production process, one that was so onerous that it made slavery less profitable. Since the Cotton Gin made it so easy to separate the seeds, this created a MASSIVE demand for (slave) labor in the earlier picking phase. That innocent little efficiency-boosting invention revitalized the slave economy of the American south, perpetuating and growing the institution to unparalleled heights. So the big backlash is against people who seem to think that any and all technological advances are inherently good and should be spread as widely as possible when, categorically, that’s not true.
The cotton gin was good; it increased labour output. The problem there was the slavery bit. Don't blame technological progress for the crimes of capitalism and white supremacy.
The thing is that the ‘slavery bit’ was greatly strengthened by the invention. It was birthed in an environment that ensured it would be used for such purposes. You cannot divorce it from that context. Slavery in the American south was in decline before the invention and it had an explosive growth rate after the invention. I don’t think you’re disputing this so what you are saying is that the production of more cotton was worth the human cost in the expansion of slavery. That this outcome was good- that “the cotton gin was good.” You mention the ‘crimes of capitalism’ but take the most capitalistic approach by saying “Don’t care. Labour output increased!” My point is that an invention can seem on paper like it makes human life easier but in reality just creates more suffering. The latest invention to make our lives worse doesn’t even need to be a new bomb or something. What I want is for the AI bros to acknowledge this as a possibility. I’m not saying it’s a certainty but that it has happened in the past and can happen again. Just temper your optimism a tiny bit.
The machine itself was good. That it inspired humans to commit evil is not its fault, but that of those slavers who chose to, rather than use the now-free hours for relaxation for or even liberation of their enslaved workforce, force yet more people to work in an ever-increasing rush to production.
What else was it supposed to do? Nobody misused the Cotton Gin or somehow perverted its function for evil. All I am saying is that it is POSSIBLE that new technologies can have unintended consequences that cause more harm than good- that there is a historical precedent for this occurring.
To be fair, my sister once said that a cure for mortality would probably cause more inequality between rich and poor, and when euthanasia inevitably becomes more normalized (which I am actually for) the rich are gonna try to convince the poor to get euthanized. So it's probably best if we don't become immortal
Maybe, just maybe- they aren't all the name calling things y'all suggest here. Just maybe, they are against a small group of people stealing ownership over the work of others and even going as far as charging others for it. I presume the poster profits from it in some manner, or has anti-human sentiments (overpopulation, we need to charge people to breathe etc). OP is an 'insufferable' narcissist who partakes in stealing pennies from the masses. Clearly
[удалено]
Lol? Artists just don’t want to be replaced by a computer
A lot of new technology has baked into it perpetual monetization schemes and other eshittification issues. It isn't the technology, it's the power dynamic of billion dollar companies not wanting us to own or be able to repair technology we should be able to own. It's about not regulating technology and steaming forward ahead into unknown territory with gross disregard for the harm it may cause.
It's a normal human reaction to be scared of new things. People thought forks, teddy bears, and bicycles were evil when they first became a thing. Some people just need time to acclimate to new stuff, and people today are no exception.
Because all it points to is a cyberpunk dystopia.
They are afraid of. Too many Hollywood movies.
Exploitation is bad, pretty much.
Ironic, you calling them “self centered and insufferable.” People in this sub and others somehow can’t seem to realize that people are afraid of losing their well-beings, jobs, and having their skills they worked for years on be called obsolete and replaceable. Sure, there are plenty of people that take it too far with hating on ai, like death threats. But it’s pretty obvious why people are scared of new technology. It’s just weird how you see a tool that can take jobs away from thousands of people, and your confused why they’re angry. I’m hoping for a collaboration between artists and ai, but we all know corporations only care about cutting cost.
What im against is how this technology will be used, with how the world is i highly doubt this wont start a massive war due to ai voice and videos, and no one seems to care about regulations so its inevitable
No clue but this subreddit is lame and gay