Raw LLM Responses

I'm kinda confused why Google would recommend this type of stuff to me. It's basically a long "I don't like AI rant," by a person that seems to understand at the topic at the level of having read a few articles written by people who also don't understand AI, and in the process has invented her own story about how it works, and her place in it, as well as adding a few chapters strawmanning the way other people engage with and use this technology by engaging with the points made by a few trolls that in turn clearly don't understand the technology particularly well. In this field "I build my own PC, I taught myself HTML and CSS, and I can run an open source program" is what you'd expect to see from an average technically-literate kid just starting high school. That's certainly not a luddite, but it's not exactly something that would make any professional take you even remotely seriously, especially if that's your claim to technical competency. To put it into terms that the audience of this channel could understand, that would be like someone calling themselves an artist because they "understand perspective", and have even "done some shading a few times." The major AI companies don't comment all that much about Nightshade poisoned art because they simply filter it out, and at that point it's not a particularly huge deal to them. I'm sure it annoyed some intern at OpenAI or Stability AI for a little while, but these companies aren't particularly keen on using *your* art specifically, they just want new content of which there are terabytes created every hour, and filtering out a tiny fraction of one percent of images that just isn't going to shift their models in a meaningful way. Another reason they're not going to talk about it, because they understand that talking about these things will get them lots of hate mail, while not really offering them anything useful. It would be akin to a large company bragging that they are able to overcome copy-protection on a game or movie; why in the world would they? The only thing that this video gets right is that AI generation is in no way "inevitable." It's just going to be another tool that people have available to them. People that understand art, and in particular photography and cinematography, are going to be able to use far more effectively and will be able to achieve amazing results. The main use-case of AI is not generating some trash tier images in chat, or answering peoples inane questions in response to a prompt with a few keywords; the actual utility of AI will be replacing control systems in robotic and manufacturing applications, in running the security systems that keep the internet from imploding, in reducing the signal strength and bandwidth requirements that will extend the internet to the farthest reaches of the globe, and in aiding the people that understand how to use AI as a force multiplier rather than attempting to use it to replace creativity. Most importantly, there's no need for huge billion dollar mega-firms for these things to happen. Those are largely marketing engines that the US is so famous for. China is releasing foundational models for a fraction of the cost of US companies, which is in fact one of the biggest things hammering these companies' profitability. It's hard to make billions when someone else is putting out systems that do what your multi-billion dollar project can do for free, after spending a few tens of million dollars on it. Though on the other hand, it's also important to consider that a few tens of millions dollars is plenty to advance this technology at a break-neck pace. Again, if you want to argue against the points AI fans like to make then by all means, knock yourself out. However, as you do this keep in mind that you're arguing against fanboys that really don't know the first thing about the direction the field is headed in. If you raise these people are representatives of what "AI is about" then all you're really doing is making it extra clear to anyone more familiar with the topic that not only do you not understand the discussion, but that you and your followers will also be happy flame them for engaging with it. With that in mind, enjoy arguing with fanboys. I really doubt I'll be back. Oh, and incidentally, your typing clip; that could easily be a video of a person writing a novel. Obviously that can't be art, after all it looks just like a Google search, right? Reductionist logic, it's not very effective.