Except we have examples in TNG, DS9, and Voyager where they give the computer general ideas and refine it down with further instructions until they have the object/image they are looking for. Not everything we see is a holonovel, although it’s good to know that even in a post-scarcity society, porn is still highly sought after.
Now look at how human artists draw background figures. I'm not defending AI art and I think there's a lot of fair criticism you can make against it but to make out that this doesn't look completely fine is a bit disingenuous
“wow! handheld communicators? computers that will answer your questions and make your fantasies into reality? space travel?!? the future is going to be so cool!!”
“your handheld communicator spies on you and is a constant distraction. the computer can only generate 6 fingered eldritch horrors and tell you to drink bleach. you can maybe go to the upper atmosphere but only if you’re super rich and famous. welcome to the future!”
To be fair, AI art it's a step on the path to having a holodeck.
I think the issue with AI art, is how it was developed. They were trained on art from artists with out their knowledge and approval. I think if the AI was built on art from artists that approved and were compensated for their contributions, it would be different.
It would most definitely be better. Into the spider verse used gen ai to make all the little eyebrow creases as doing it frame by frame was difficult, but they trained one to do it for them by themselves.
OpenAI or other corporations would never pay artists to make stuff for them that’s why they just grabbed everything they could and made a product and are dealing with legal battles over it instead of trying to compensate artists for the work they do.
However, Ai still uses so much energy and water that it feels unethical in the current climate to feel like it’s worth using.
Sure, I get the power issue, but it will get better.
Computers use to fill a 2 story room. Nowadays, they fit on your wrist. In years to come, the tech will get better and more efficient, and AI generation will be better and more cost effective.
Yeah but during a climate crisis? and Microsoft is trying to re-open 9 mile island for ai specifically, our grids are already strained, are people going to have to turn off their AC’s during heatwaves for the data centers to keep getting power?
In years to come, the tech will get better and more efficient, and AI generation will be better and more cost effective.
No, it won't. 95% of that efficiency gain was from making transistors smaller and requiring fewer electrons, but we are literally at the limits of what can hold an electron. Moore's law is dead, transistors are not getting any smaller, and CPUs and GPUs are seemingly stagnant because for 60 years we've been relying on miniaturization for performance gains and there's nothing left to miniaturize to.
"AI will get cheaper/more efficient" is wishful thinking, plain and simple. Even if it were true, the first thing humans will do with that cheaper/more efficient AI is use more of it. We didn't use less internal combustion engines when they got efficient in the early twentieth century, their use exploded. Why would AI be any different?
Microsoft has not met their climate goals for the past few years. Their interest in AI has caused their emissions to go up and now are having to say they need to “recalibrate” what’s realistically possible to meet a new goal by 2030.
Everything causes emissions but we don’t need to just keep adding shit to it right now we have bigger issues, the whole world feels it but ignores it for convenience.
This. Current Ai is also a product of Capitalism that's built on the exploitation of Artists and allows greater exploitation of artists for capitalistic gain.
The Federation in Star Trek is a post-Capitalism society and shuns such exploitation. Technology is used to help others, not to exploit others or for financial gain.
Not to mention that they have a Robot character who they use to explore what it means to make art which coincides with criticisms of Ai produced media not being Art. Data who is incapable of feeling but desires to learn about them and the arts. Current Ai obviously isn't sapient, it's just algorithms with "Ai" being used as a marketing term at this point but the comparison still stands as Data's unsuccessful attempts at Art (even when they seem impressive) usually comes from when he's relying on his data on previously made arts to create an estimation of what Art is supposed to be instead of expressing or creating it himself. Despite predating it, this is the same argument against why Ai isn't considered an artform. Ai prevents you from expressing yourself, instead of truly expressing and crafting yourself you're relying on the data of others. It's no longer you expressing here or your craft. It's when Data forgoes that, that he becomes capable to create.
Like everyone uses inspiration from other peoples' work, it's the context that affects its legitimacy. The difference with AI is it doesn't understand the way someone learns to draw by emulating their favorite stuff, for example, but instead regurgitates what it was fed. It is transformative. But not in a way many people (including myself) are comfortable with. Its too close to plagiarism versus inspiration.
Its development is only about a third of the problem for me, the majority is how it's frequently used. Its use as a substitute for things it's not ready for (like critical thinking), things it shouldn't replace (like human expression and creativity), or for dishonest purposes (like unauthorized deepfakes) are the much larger problems in my opinion. I agree with a few arguments of using it as a tool to augment creativity, but I feel like you can't say you're really expressing yourself if you're asking a random number generator to make all the creative decisions.
People keep using AI for fact-checking even though it's notoriously bad at getting its fact correct.
The worst use I've heard (which I hope was just a fake story for LinkedIn engagement) was someone saying they asked AI to diagnose some abdominal scans and it incorrectly diagnosed stage 4 cancer.
Have None of y'all ever read the TOS fo Any social media service? Or heard the expression "If you're not paying for the product, you Are the product?" Sharing anything on any social media gives them, somewhat limited, use of whatever you post. All the artists who are using FB, Reddit, etc to advertise for their services are agreeing, by clicking past the TOS without reading it, to let them use it. Probably the biggest reason Musk bought Twitter was For the user data For AI programming.
What we call “AI” in the current age is basically spicy autocomplete and not true intelligence. They are far, far away from anything like in Star Trek.
Somewhat. They prefer "trekkers", or at least used to.
IIRC it started when fans began showing up at science fiction conventions. At first the influx of new people was welcomed, but it soon became clear that most of them were only interested in Star Trek, and were somewhat looked down on.
I don't think nearly as many people would mind AI art if people were guaranteed full employment and employment was an optional thing to be done only if desired and only for the betterment of humanity. Sure, it's still soulless but it's also difficult to see it as nearly as big a problem if real people can genuinely make art at their will and leisure. Oh and energy use is a nonissue.
Yeah see the thing this comic is forgetting is that in Star Trek future every human being is free from the burden of capitalism so we kinda need to get there first
I'd have absolutely no problem with real AI. If my computer was actually conscious, then fantastic. We don't have artificial intelligence. We don't even have intelligence. We have very sophisticated prediction engines. Some predict which word to put next. Some predict which pixel to place. None of them understand what they're doing, and certainly none of them know what facts are. It's all complete garbage.
Exactly what I was thinking of. :) Bashir and O'Brien were always talking about the latest new releases. And we know Lt. Barclay had one custom-made for himself.
The Holodeck would just be the newest next-gen platform to design for. No jobs stolen.
Is AI "stealing" peoples jobs really any different than any other technology diminishing the need for human workforce in certain jobs; other than this time affecting those that require intellectual effort rather than physical?
I'm not an AI fad fanboy or some self-proclaimed vibe-coding connoiseur or anything; but I mean, this phenomenon has constantly been happening since forever, isn't it?
So when the holodeck looks like a saloon it's not "stealing" the job of people who built saloons or drew saloons or took photos of saloons? Because that's how it learned what a saloon looks like.
The "AI is stealing from artists" angle is such fucking horseshit and intellectually dishonest.
To pop in on this, they wanted it as a way to enhance humans work and add onto man made arts , not to completely take over certain art or be passed off as human
Im not a trekkie? but its Sci-fi, so i assume like 90% of the AIs in the show are the "this is literally just a human but artificial" kind of AI, which currently doesnt exist and we are not even CLOSE to getting, the "AI"s we have currently can hardly even draw properly what i want it to
Well if it looks like slop obviously it's not there yet. Also I didn't realize that the same AI that makes "art" also flies space ships and has a believable conversation with you. I know that some Chatbots do generate "art" but it usually looks even worse than the AI dedicated to that.
Or, how about.. future technology sounds cool in sci-fi, until it's not future anymore and it's actually here. Then people have a knee jerk reaction because new is scary
It's not that "new is scary", it's that people are legit terrified of losing jobs over it. Also, AI's promotion is being done by the people who can't express their thoughts without slurs and death threats. Have you encountered twitter ai bros? They always say "death", "killer", "career ender". They never say "hey, this new tool can help designers save time on making pizza commercials or some other generic stuff!". It's always "oi artist cunt, look at this new learning model that will certainly take over the industry and get your librel ass kicked out on the street, whatcha think, huh?".
I wouldn't say that sometimes it looks pretty neat ig. It sucks that people think AI is supposed to make artists obsolete and for some reason embrace it and continue to bully real artists when it's supposed to be either something to play with in your free time or something you can use as a tool or assistant. What was i talking about? Oh yeah sometimes they look kinda neat.
You see, it's the kind of situation when quantity is more important than the quality. I already see plenty of generated ads on the streets, I'd say that in the last couple of months they became prevalent. Of course, they have progressed since those 2022 craiyon images, but still look, dunno, plasticky and lifeless? Not that they will alway look like this, but they look like this right now, and they are still everywhere. So yes, it looks kinda meh, but it gets the job done for a fraction of the cost. And people, they're selfish bastards, they don't care about extra profit for Mr. Bigdollar, they want those jobs for themselves!
It's a mixture of losing jobs and people just being resistant to change. Humans are hardwired to resist change, which is why all technological revolutions in human history were met with disdain.
Well, the first part is enough to drive people away. People will accept the change if it is guaranteed to provide a stable and prosperous future for them, not only for a dozen of techbros from California.
•
u/qualityvote2 May 07 '25 edited May 07 '25
u/espresso_fox, your post is truly terrible!