“Newspaper which uses AI to write its articles concocts derogatory term for people who doesn’t use AI”
Imo vegan shouldn’t be seen as derogatory. I’m not one, but got a lot of respect for most of em.
it shouldn’t, but years of lobbying and demonization online certainly have made it so
Wow, thank you so much for sharing this. What a major blow to the Guardian’s credibility
It was short lived. It is often called the Grauniad because of poor quality typos etc. historically.
Got a source for the Guardian no longer using AGI? Given a ‘desperately trying to convince people that AI is cool’ title like this, discontinued use seems highly unlikely
I was referring to their credibility being short lived. I have no idea of their AGI usage. I’m still annoyed that when the UK Labour party had a left wing leader, they spent a lot of effort discrediting him. They’re usually crap on Israel/Palestine and have been historically pro-zionist on the UK site.
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.
It’s an incredibly stupid phrase. Like, mind-numbingly stupid. “I’m not gluten free, I’m a bread vegan.” Idiotic
Yeah… It’s just abstaining from something. Veganism didn’t invent that. Dumb headline
Abstaining from a thing does not make one a vegan. That’s not how any of this works.
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.
Awe so the article author has a vendetta against vegans got it.
But it makes people come off as extremely annoying. So that’s working.
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”.
It follows, but it is also feels like click bait.
A definition of vegan is:
A vegetarian who eats plant products only, especially one who uses no products derived from animals, as fur or leather.
There is an environmental parallel, and it made me read the article to see what they were on about – so I guess it worked.
To be clear, I am very pro environment (I live in it); I just feel like this is crossing the streams of related, but completely different movements, isn’t particularly helpful.
Abstaining from animal products is just vegetarian. Veganism requires an extremely strict adherence to a very specific set of rules concerning animals.
Vegetarians can eat cheese, which is an animal product.
We don’t need to invent new terms, like ‘AI Vegan’, when we have a perfectly good term already: Butlerian Jihadist.
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.
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.
“refuse” lol as if there were a general requirement to use this shit
This caught my eye as well. Haha. Some people are constantly looking for a machine to rage against.
This is such a stupid name for this.
The better term would be “LLM gobbling fuckheads” for those who use that stuff and believe it has anything to do with “AI”
sloppers
Perfect
“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?
I don’t agree with the framing, either, but they’re drawing parallels between people not using something due to a principled moral stance. (As well as some not-so-subtle implication that these people are holier-than-thou, too.)
Seems like it. Because vegan is already seen as a ridiculouse thing and “the enemy” by the average person
I don’t use ai either. But because it’s fuckin stupid. It’s not even ai. It’s a glorified sorting algorithm.
Missed opportunity to coin the term “Aitheist” Fools.
VAIgans.
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.
We let environmentalism become an individual issue, and that was a mistake.
Everyone knows it’s not an individual issue, corporations are constantly buying up political shielding and support, as well as media opinions, to ensure that “the economy” remains more important than the environment and that they, the ones responsible for all the shit, don’t get regulated or properly fined and blamed.
I don’t really agree that “everyone knows this” when everyone I know talks about environmentalism almost exclusively in terms of individual impact.
I hate the term AI vegan. I prefer mistechnitinoimosyne. More classy.
I refuse to use it because it’s shit.
We are not the same.
Every last bit of it? What is your stance on use of AI for tasks such as data analysis of massive sets for scientific research, or procedural automation of massive operations?
AI doesn’t exist, machine learning algorithms can be useful and are used with no controversy, generative bullshit is basically useless.
You’re using a lot of very loosely defined terms with a lot of certainty. Machine learning is AI, we just usually apply it to the more simple versions of it. Where do you personally draw the line? I fully understand the plethora of risks, downsides, and injustices that can potentially be involved in the matter, but I legitimately don’t understand the extremist level hatred that some people express to anything that could hold the title of AI. To me, it parallels with someone saying that they hate ionizing radiation. Frequently, it’s also bad, and your entirely reasonable to try and avoid it on a daily basis, but it also has many uses that are beneficial and life-saving.
Don’t try to argue with the lemmy anti-AI crowd, it’s not worth it.
Yes, I am also frequently accosted by Google’s data analysis of massive sets for scientific research. I can’t tell you how many times they’ve forcefully inserted research analysis of large data sets into my search results.
What?
It’s quite common for me to be annoyed, angry, or upset at a headline writer. Then there’s the feeling I got reading “Meet the AI vegans.”
Whole new level.
Its so wacky out there. When I read something like this I’m sure its The Onion. And its not. Then I read a headline about US politics and its totally believable , alas its The Onion.
Seems to me you‘re a BS vegan.
I refuse to believe this title is anything other than engagement-bait, personally.
Yeah, pretty disappointing to see from the Guardian.
