Yet these aren't a fault of the tech itself. They're the fault of the companies doing said theft, and the governments either silently or openly ebracing said theft. And economic bubble fueling the theft and the unprecedented rate of datacenters popping up.

I like to compare AI to photography. Both are/were revolutionary. Both killed jobs. Both raised copyright issues. Yet photography today is an integral part of life. And I'm afraid LLM chatbots will be as well in ad few as 15 years.

There's no stopping technological progress, even when it's actively blocked - let alone when governments feed billions into it and take a blind eye to all its issues.

So the case isn't as clear cut. You can admit defeat now, or you can wait a bit. You can be the sole hermit not using it in a world which does. Which is a personal choice for everyone. The only thing to ask is: is it the right one for an open source project?

Rejecting "known unethical" tools does seem like a sensible approach though. Either make your own, use a known-good one or do things the old fashioned way. No leaded gas in our vicinity allowed.

[–] warm@kbin.earth 1 points 7 hours ago

Photography isnt dangerous, it's a form of art, capturing something that is real and tangible.

AI is fabricating something that isnt real, using works that were real. It's dangerous, it's not art. The only people who put time into is productions are the ones it stole from.

While I get what you are trying to say, it's a terrible comparison. AI is already causing a lot of harm to humanity and will continue to do so. We should reject it for as long as we can, hopefully forever. If it does stay, it should be heavily, heavily regulated.