FaceDeer

It’s not the difference you think it is. Lots of people who use AI art generators don’t call themselves artists either. I certainly don’t, because I don’t care whether I’m called an artist. I just want the art.

I think you may be generalizing a stereotype.

This community where we’re discussing this right now is literally intended for following tech news. It is for people who follow tech news.

You are mistaking a specific kind of AI for all AI. That’s like saying a tulip isn’t a flower because you believe flowers are roses.

Jarvis is a fictional example of a kind of AI known as Artificial General Intelligence, or AGI.

Technology that allows us to do something we could not do before - such as create nuclear explosions, or propel metal slugs at extreme velocities, or design new viruses - unquestionably offer a benefit and don’t require discipline to integrate into our lives in a balanced manner?

The people who commission artists have no interest in being an artist; they simply want the product. Are people who commission artists also “slowly committing suicide?”

I think ego is an underestimated source for a lot of the anti-AI rage. It’s like a sort of culture-wide narcissism, IMO. We’ve spent millennia patting ourselves on the back about how special and unique human creativity is, and now a commodity graphics card can come up with better ideas than most people.

The term “AI” was established in 1956 at the Dartmouth workshop and covers a very broad range of topics in computer science. It definitely encompasses large language models.

Okay, make it sound worse and even more unprofitable.

Making their AI models cheaper to run (such as by requiring less electricity) is one step along that path to profitability.

Sure, they might not. But he gives no basis for saying that other than what he “believes.”

People in this community, and on the Fediverse in general, seem to be strongly anti-AI and would like to believe things that make it sound bad and unprofitable. So when an article like this comes along and says exactly what you want to believe it’s easy to just nod and go “knew it!” Rather than investigating the reasons for those beliefs and risking finding out something you didn’t want to know.

If the model is cheaper to run then they are able to reduce the price without reducing profit, which gives them an advantage over competitors and draws in more customer activity. OpenAI is far from a monopoly.

I based my argument on actual numbers that can be looked up and verified. You “believe” that they “seem” to be doing something else. Based on what?

And perhaps even more importantly, the per-token cost of GPT-5’s API is less than GPT-4’s. That’s why OpenAI was so eager to move everyone onto it, it means more profit for them.