Also you could write down the artist’s name and that way there’s at least the possibility that someone might commission them or purchase art if they like the style.
No, its worse.
When you steal human created art off the internet you aren’t actively harming the environment. You arguably dont even harm the artist because you would never pay them anyway.
When you use an ai image generator, you are actively harming the environment, and actively harming artists by supporting tools that are trained on their art without consent.
Just use the human art, or something like picrew where people make things specifically for folks to use to make their characters for stuff like vtt
Mordikan@kbin.earth 1 day ago
I find the environmental argument is always a weak one to make, though. CO2 emissions for non-AI datacenters peaks currently around 210 million tons, with AI datacenters peaking currently around 100 million tons.
So why is more pollution from subject A acceptable, but less from subject B isn't?
I've seen people say because A gives "something of worth", but then that just undermines the whole point of being harmful to the environment. Destruction of the environment is kinda an absolute in that instance, the source shouldn't be the deciding factor in whether or not we accept it.
The same for the water usage thing (which was debunked). AI datacenters use 68 billions gallons annually (at least by 2028 projected). People are upset about that, but not about the 26 trillion gallons that US agriculture uses. All because "something of worth", but if it's that big of a deal why are people focusing on less than 1% of the total consumption? How is that 1% needing protected but the remaining 99% totally disposable?
apotheotic@beehaw.org 19 hours ago
I contain multitudes. I can protest the mass growth of datacentres for other industries as well as for AI.
I hadn’t mentioned water usage, but since you bring it up, AI datacentres are being plopped down willy nilly and sucking up all the water from their local area, causing drought. Thats one stark difference between it and agriculture, which isn’t having the same kind of local effect.
However, the US (and other) agriculture+ industry (again, I contain multitudes) doesn’t get a pass. Estimates vary, but it looks like about 30-50% of US agriculture water usage goes to feed which is destined for livestock for the meat industry. I’d say that a person can be both against AI and an outspoken vegan against the meat industry, wouldn’t you?
TehPers@beehaw.org 17 hours ago
Before AI, people had been advocating against the meat industry, and had pushed for reduced water usage in agriculture and homes, which led to stricter rules against lawns in drought-prone areas. It being drowned out by the advocacy against AI doesn’t mean those voices disappeared, just that there are louder voices now.
I do enjoy the classic “they’re doing bad so I can too” fallacy, though.
apotheotic@beehaw.org 16 hours ago
I’m confused, it seems we agree with eachother - did you mean to reply to the person I replied to, or were you just adding on to my point? :D
Mordikan@kbin.earth 10 hours ago
"they're doing bad so I can too"
I don't think you understand that the "so I can" part implies you. By virtue of even posting, YOU are pushing datacenter demand. These comments don't just live in the ether. The whole point is you are cherry picking what you are upset about based on what is trending (as you even mentioned). The point being you are MORE upset about the lesser evil, not that one is justified evil and the other isn't.
If you enjoy the Two Wrongs Make Right fallacy, then I think you'll love the Special Pleading fallacy.
Mordikan@kbin.earth 10 hours ago
AI datacenters do not cause drought. There is no evidence to support that claim. And if you think you do have evidence, I would love to see the source.
And you totally can contain multitudes. People should be like that. But they in practice aren't. They follow what is trending. For example, if you look through your comment history how many comments will be pertaining to the US meat industry? How many to datacenters?
I would argue that you care a great deal more about one than the other. Which, going back to my original point, why is that 1% more important than the remaining 99% (or specifically the 50% that you care so much about)?
apotheotic@beehaw.org 6 hours ago
I don’t have evidence on hand, but I have read compelling scholarly articles previously on the matter. Feel free to disregard this discussion point if that’s a dealbreaker.
Your argument would be incorrect, as I have been vegetarian for over 2 decades and vegan for the last 5 years. I’ve just found that trying to sway people online about the meat industry is a fool’s errand, whereas I have had decent success in having constructive conversations about the harms of AI. My meat industry related efforts are focused primarily on face to face interactions.
My stance on AI isn’t based on what’s “trending”, except for the fact that it, as a pretty existential threat in its current trajectory of resource usage, job displacement, and market “growth”, is rapidly starting to infest every aspect of my life. So yes, the trend that AI is following is causing my stance on it to be pertinent to a growing number of conversations.
I’m curious though, what would I have to be doing for you to believe that I’m… I dont know, “allowed”? to talk about AI’s water usage impact?
A_be_seedy@beehaw.org 16 hours ago
I find the electric usage one to be strong. If you have a lot of data centers near, your electric will go up.
Similarly, if you have a data center near you, your water bill will go up, and your well may dry up.
Data centers are demanding incentives from governments across the country with promises of lots of jobs, but they just need the people to supplement their low usage of utilities.
Mordikan@kbin.earth 9 hours ago
That is a valid point, I think. That isn't "but what about the environment" but only when convenient. That is local pricing issue which has a very direct and very trackable impact.
If a datacenter opens next door to you, the utility consumption goes up meaning your bill goes up. Unless the datacenter operators are somehow offsetting that increase financially (and that the money is actually be allocated by the city for that purpose), then there is the real impact of datacenters.
CptHacke@piefed.social 22 hours ago
I completely agree.