• zeca@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    4 days ago

    Im also a gun vegan, a car vegan, a facebook vegan, an exercise vegan (unfortunately), a windows vegan, … just not actual vegan.

    I feel like thats a bad way to use the word vegan.

  • Rose@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    61
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 days ago

    This makes about as much sense as calling Linux users “Windows vegans”.

    Choosing to not use AI isn’t some wacky contrarian position, it’s a tame position that can easily be justified. (Don’t want to use AI? Then don’t.) If anything, trying to assert that constantly using AI for everything would be the new normal is the wacky position.

  • normalexit@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    109
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    Abstaining from a thing does not make one a vegan. That’s not how any of this works.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      5 days ago

      It’s like how they put the word gate after something to say that it is a scandal involving the former word.

      Somesort of political scandal involving road maintenance? Oh yes well that’s roadgate then. Even though the Watergate scandal was in fact it scandal in the watergate hotel, rather than a scandal about water.

    • JuxtaposedJaguar@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      5 days ago

      I mean, abstaining from animal products makes someone a vegan, right? If you abstain from AI products then it would follow that you’re an “AI vegan”.

  • guillem@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    361
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 days ago
    • Teetotalers: alcohol vegans.
    • Straight edgers: drug vegans.
    • Recycling: waste vegans.
    • Solar power: power vegans.

    The possibilities are infinite if you are a netaphor vegan.

  • abbiistabbii@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    104
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    Calling them after a maligned (if harmless) group seems like a choice to paint refusing to use AI as being annoying, preachy and scorn-worthy.

    They seem very determined to pressure people into using AI regardless of it’s practicality, environmental impact, or anything. Fuck this shit.

    • mostlikelyaperson@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      5 days ago

      There’s been recent pushes in that regard, investment in AI shit has been enormous but the financial payoff for anyone besides hardware manufacturers remains nonexistent. So investors and corporations have recently redoubled their efforts into trying to get everyone to use it in the hopes that this somehow will make them profitable.

  • udon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    “refuse” lol as if there were a general requirement to use this shit

  • Allemaniac@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 days ago

    “AI vegans”? I knew guardian was already bought by tech bros, but wtf is that phrasing lmao I dont use AI either, simply because it is wrong more often than not and I am still capable of googling myself, but being cautious equals to being vegan in tech bro eyes?

  • raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    4 days ago

    The better term would be “LLM gobbling fuckheads” for those who use that stuff and believe it has anything to do with “AI”

  • reksas@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    53
    ·
    5 days ago

    i wonder if they came up with such term to mock those who dont want to use ai and possibly actual vegans on the side.

  • jsomae@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    4 days ago

    We let environmentalism become an individual issue, and that was a mistake. Can we not do this for AI? It’s a society-wide problem, not something you can solve by measuring your own personal AI footprint.

  • Brett@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    178
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 days ago

    “AI vegans”

    ffs, just publish an article with a single clownemoji for the same effect.

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      86
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      6 days ago

      The big corporations desperately want AI to be popular because they’ve thrown literally insane amounts of money at it and still don’t know how to monetize it.

      There’s going to be a huge push to make it seem like everyone loves it and it’s weird not to use it constantly

      It’s going to go horribly and come off like that “fellow kids” meme, exactly like this headline

        • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          5 days ago

          Ironically enough they’re the same trolls as the vegan drama.

          They don’t care about the topic, they just want to troll and they’ve been up/device banned from all the major social media, so they’ll always be here

      • randomblock1@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 days ago

        A good example were those Apple AI ads. So cringe. Google’s ads aren’t much better but at least Gemini works.

      • zildjiandrummer1@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        6 days ago

        AI in this form has been used for like 15 years, to generate trillions of dollars worth of value. I think you’re just talking specifically about ChatGPT and consumer-facing LLMs.

      • Canaconda@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        6 days ago

        still don’t know how to monetize it.

        They do know how to monetize it. API access generated $1Billion in 2023. There’s also huge R&D potential in fields like genetic research and medicine.

        Profitability is another question though. Likely we’re waiting for advances in cold fusion or late stage renewable development for energy costs to go down enough.

          • Canaconda@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            13
            ·
            6 days ago

            Yes my second paragraph alleged as much. Not that you read that far of course.

        • Warl0k3@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          20
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 days ago

          AI having to wait on cold fusion for profitability is one of the funnier concepts I’ve heard today, thank you.

        • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 days ago

          People pay for the “premium” because they believe the makers who said it can increase their profitability and make them money.

          My employer keeps trying to shove it down our throats too.

          They’re desperate to find anyway to make it reduce work, be cause they’ve already paid for it under the assumption it would let them cut staffing

          Now they’re finding out they got swindled, do you think they’ll re-up on AI?

          The AI companies offloaded how to monetize it to consumers and scared them into being left behind unless they discovered how to use it.

          It’s a short term bubble.