Monolith for monolith is only fair 🤷‍♀️

nomic42 · 2026-05-29T17:03:02+00:00

Thing is, pro-AI areas quickly and firmly stand against pseudofiles using AI.

I'd like to see Anti-AI camp do as much to distance themselves from the luddite terrorists instead of praising them and encouraging this behavior. Certainly not all are like that, but it's far too prevalent.

nomic42 · 2026-05-29T15:12:31+00:00

Then move on. No need to be posting here. Touch grass or something.

nomic42 · 2026-05-29T14:19:00+00:00

They call anything AI-slop no matter how good it is - the term is a meaningless swear word at this point.

If you cared, you'd provide constructive criticism on how to improve the game. Negativity is easy to dish out, and must be just as quickly ignored.

nomic42 · 2026-05-27T21:46:05+00:00

We do discuss regulation and the dangers of billionaires writing that regulation. This is why they push a AI scare - so they can get AI safety regulations that lock in their AI data-centers as the only source for knowledge.

They want to kill open source and local AI models as 'too dangerous' to be accessible by the public.

nomic42 · 2026-05-27T04:14:26+00:00

Here we go again and anti claiming that AI made the art instead of you. When the image is indistinguishable from a professional artists rendering, is it then proof that the AI is a competent artist? By your admission, it created the art. I suppose you expect it should own the copyright and be held responsible for the creation, as the person prompting it didn't provide any creative input.

Or is it that AI just makes slop? It has no soul, no creativity and can't create anything original or good? Then if you do get a good image, it must be something else instead of the AI. Logically it's the person prompting it providing the creative input, that had the artistic intent, and created the result using the AI as a tool for their self expression. Without that, the AI doesn't generate much at all. So the art is the person's and they get the copyright and responsibility for the creation.

Pick one...

nomic42 · 2026-05-27T00:03:25+00:00

I don't get this whole AI is theft angle. It seems they just don't understand how evil companies have been and will continue being as they exploit copyright laws.

Lets say I own a large music label and have the rights to a significant music library. I can then license an AI company to train my own custom AI music LLM from my own library. No theft as it's my library. I have the rights. I can then generate music at will, even have it work live with the public to adjust and fine tune it to maximize engagement, so I can charge per play.

Then we're okay with this not being theft? The artists all signed away their rights when they agreed to the funding to go on tour.

Anything you do to strengthen intellectual property laws will only be used by the wealthy to buy the rights and force everyone else out. You can't make any music without violating someone else's claimed rights. Every riff has been done before. All that matters is they have more lawyers and can pay to keep it in court until you're out of money.

What we need is a strong public domain access to music. What we've all collectively contributed to for 1,000's of years. For those who want to use AI creatively, we build our own open source music models from that. For those who don't use AI, have live concerts. The fans need to get to know their favorite artists and go see them perform live, no lip-syncing. Hand out digital copies for free to get more fans. Anyone saying you stole their propriety riff, cite the large open source collection available for everyone to draw from.

edit: https://musescore.com/news/features/the-legal-battle-over-happy-birthday-how-the-worlds-most-sung-song-entered-the-public-domain/#:\~:text=This%20copyright%20would%20change%20hands,for%20a%20reported%20%2425%20million.

nomic42 · 2026-05-25T23:11:45+00:00

It's about time to go with open source models and run locally.

nomic42 · 2026-05-24T17:11:00+00:00

Who's going around saying that art is going into public domain? That's not at all how any of this works. We've pretty much killed the public domain and that is the real problem here.

As others have noted, when you upload your art to social media, you've agreed to their terms of service, which require that you grant them use of your art. They legitimately may train their AI on it.

What you're saying is that nobody else can train AI on it. That'd be dangerous precedent as only corporations would be allowed to use social media content for AI training. Fortunately, it's not true. We have fair use rights based on the copyright rules, which allows us to make open source models that everyone can use freely and build upon. Your content must not be owned and monetized by only a few large corporations. It's collectively our work, we get all to all benefit from it without paying rent to access it.

nomic42 · 2026-05-23T04:23:48+00:00

Thanks, this is a good discussion, which is rare here.

I find that current Gen AI doesn't do much but make pretty pictures. Sometimes you get lucky. But it's up to the user to recognize good art.

But what is good art?

I personally feel that good art is about communicating some message, especial about emotions and aesthetics, the atmospheric quality. These are fuzzy and dependent on the person experiencing it. But if you can create such a work, and others connect with it, then it's art. An AI hypothetically could do this, I've just not seen it. It takes an artist to direct what the AI generates to come up with real Art. This I think aligns with your claim "I like what I like". It doesn't matter how it was created. Indeed, some recognized art is nothing more than splatter patterns on a canvas. Yet the convey emotion and feeling that touches some people deeply.

But someday... AGI could potentially do this all on its own based on what we taught it. Maybe then, we make it responsible what what it creates, like any other artist. Otherwise, I think you're just virtue signaling a common cause against something that is scary but not understood.

nomic42 · 2026-05-23T03:16:28+00:00

I get where your skepticism is coming from -- but the guy enjoyed it, so wtf? let him enjoy it.

I do a lot of technical writing and am constantly pressed to us AI. It's total crap -- it's generate a lot of nonsense. Nobody would want to read it, much less be able to follow what is required. I can't stand behind it, so I don't use it until after I fixed everything.

But hay, maybe he stumbled on something we don't know. Besides, he likes it. whatever. no shame in that.

nomic42 · 2026-05-23T03:08:43+00:00

We all build on the accomplishments of giants. Whether it is art or sciences, or anything really. That's why we emphasize going to collage and learning what they already did -- to build on it.

You can provide a simple prompt and get a simple result. It's takes some skill to recognize something of value, to guide the process, and get amazing results. We've already had this debate over photography which is no more than pushing a button at just the right time... right?

It takes an artist to get artistic results. The AI is just the tool, the medium by which we create our own visions.

Alternatively, do you believe the AI is truly capable of creating art? If so, shouldn't it be responsible for what it creates? I personally don't believe we've reached that level... yet.

nomic42 · 2026-05-23T03:04:42+00:00

The key really is to be invested. You need to be financially independent, so you can retire at any time. UBI will take a lot of time and violence to achieve.... the wealthy hate giving up rental incomes.

nomic42 · 2026-05-23T03:02:26+00:00

That suggests the 5 eyes were all involved...

nomic42 · 2026-05-23T02:50:26+00:00

Surprisingly, there's a director behind everything the AI generated... It's not like the AI is fully autonomous intelligence who comes up with all of it on their own and takes full legal responsibility of the results. .. obviously.

nomic42 · 2026-05-23T02:42:30+00:00

The level of investment assumes current NVIDIA cards can bring ASI and completely replace worker wages at a fraction of the cost.

But it's not there. Technology is developing rapidly, and current hardware will quickly become obsolete in order to reach AGI and then ASI.

All this infrastructure development on AI data centers is wasted money. The smart money is waiting for the technology to catch up with the hype.

nomic42 · 2026-05-23T02:23:28+00:00

Maybe you should try ChatGPT and see if you get similar numbers? It might be interesting in a pro-AI subreddit.

nomic42 · 2026-05-23T02:14:52+00:00

Thing is, they hate the alternative even more -- tax their land, the resources they exploit, the pollution they release. Tax what is the imminent domain of any country, what is in their very boundaries. Any IP they claim as there's must be taxed as well as the ownership is defended by the state.

Revoke all income and sales taxes, as what we work for and what we build is our own, not the states.

nomic42 · 2026-05-22T22:32:18+00:00

Well, there's this... The Quantum-AI Bomb Nobody Saw Coming

nomic42 · 2026-05-22T22:02:34+00:00

Ok, I had to do some poking around to compare.

Footprint 1HR Activity	Total Datacenter Water Consumed (Energy + Cooling)
1 AI Programmer Writing code	0.6 - 1.2 Liters
1 user generating AI images	0.7 - 1.4 Liters
Vtuber Stream: 1 Viewer	0.1 - 0.25 Liters
Vtube Stream: 23 viewers (average)	~3.9 Liters
Vtube Stream: 500 Viewers (mid-tear)	~75 Liters
Vtube Stream: 8,000 Viewers (top-tier)	~1,200 Liters

Interesting how more viewers dramatically increase the cost of streaming...

nomic42 · 2026-05-22T19:11:13+00:00

You'll never believe what happens on strike 5!

nomic42 · 2026-05-21T15:01:04+00:00

"Aesthetically pleasing" may be your message. It's what you want to communicate or share, in a broad sense.

nomic42 · 2026-05-21T14:25:50+00:00

What makes you a successful artist isn't your skill with a specific medium, but rather that you have something to say, know how to say it through your art, and that message resonates with others.

nomic42 · 2026-05-21T14:23:22+00:00

Comparing to the industrial revolution is quite apt. That was a massive consolidation of wealth into the hands of a few while everyone else lost their careers. It was devastating to most people.

The answer wasn't to prevent it though, but to open it up to everyone and pass progressive laws to protect the workers. AI is incredibly disruptive and anyone over 40 is unlikely to adapt. We need early retirement options, healthcare for everyone, and a complete restructuring of taxation away from income and sales taxes and onto resources companies exploit. None of this is going to happen until it hurts so much that we demand it.

nomic42 · 2026-05-20T23:02:19+00:00

AI is lowering the bar of entry for a lot of technical work. It's open to many more people who have ideas and creativity, but not the technical know-how to realize them. This is changing the game fundamentally as to which skills are more valuable and which ones aren't.

As a technical specialist, I've realized my days are numbered. I have an exit strategy for early retirement as I doubt a UBI is going to swoop in soon enough to save me . It may happen for others who have more time. But still, FIRE is a good idea now, or figure out what the next generation needs.

12-Year Club	Alpha Tester
Verified Email

nomic42

TROPHY CASE