I don’t particularly use generative IAs that create Alt Text from images, but I’ve seen a lot of people who do use them and I think that’s the only use of AI from which I can’t draw anything negative.
The fact is that there are many people who do not know how to make a good Alt Text, and therefore either do not put them or put one that is only the word “photo/image”, which is much worse.
I think if AI had started there, as a tool to help accessibility, it wouldn’t have the stigma it has today.
But of course, there are not enough blind people in the world from whom to get absurdly, ridiculously, vulgarly obscene amounts of profit…
That’s a perfect example of what I always say, you’re not mad a GenAI as a technology, you’re mad at Capitalism.
The problem is capitalism, but the technology was produced under capitalism and you’re using this technology under capitalism. So, a distinction without a difference.
Every technology we use in the modern day was produced under capitalism
And you can’t separate the technology from it’s historical and material context. We could say “capitalist LLMs” instead of just “LLMs” every time we talk about the technology, but is that useful?
Ok, so photography is as bad in your eyes as LLMs I take it?
First you say “you’re not mad a GenAI as a technology, you’re mad at Capitalism” and then when I agree with you you move the goal posts to argue against it? Are you just arguing for its own sake?
It’s like I never left Reddit!
Talking to you was a mistake. You’re just trying to “win” the conversation, you don’t actually care about anything I have to say.
I’m done. You can have the last word.
I wasn’t trying to win anything. You argued that all technology under capitalism is unethical. So since clearly we can conceive some things as worse than others, I was trying to distill where the difference lies according to you.
But it’s rich that you claim I don’t care about anything you had to say when you butted in unprompted to grandstand. Looks like reddit was inside you all along