cross-posted from: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/post/46123456
That’s how I felt waking up this morning (as of posting). Who else can relate?
this post was submitted on 01 Aug 2026
195 points (94.1% liked)
memes
22142 readers
3119 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads/AI Slop
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
No, absolutely false. Generative ai is literally generating text and images or even videos from a prompt. If you conflate everything it's very easy to dismiss criticism, but if you actually contend with anti-ai arguments you will find they all use this definition.
Here's the Wikipedia definition:
What part of it says it is just chatbots? Notice that of says "other forms of data" there? That is because audio, video, and chatbots are the most common cases, not the only cases. Prompts are not even needed. You just have a bunch of data points forming a distribution, and you want a model that samples faithfully from that distribution.
I agree that the word "AI" and even "generative AI" is being used to basically describe big tech that pushes their products on people like OpenAI and Anthropic, but you gotta understand that relying on context is bound to create misunderstanding. Context doesn't travel along like words do.
Do you not see how incredibly broad your definition is compared to wikis or mine? I agree that wiki definitions often use qualifiers in order to avoid making absolute statements, but wiki and I absolutely do agree about this.
I am struggling to take your claim of simple miscommunication seriously. The context of the gen ai debate that's been raging for 3+ years is not in flux: we have all been saying the same things about the same chatbots, and the idea that anti-ai people just hate medicine or weather or animals or whatever is just... deeply disrespectful and annoying. You can at least just learn what we're opposed to, before defending ai from attacks and arguments that were never made and would be silly to try to make.
You accused me of conflating AI with generative AI while an entire community continuously conflates generative AI with an amalgamation of corporate interests and its irresponsible use. The wiki avoids using absolute statements because that is the proper way to communicate.
What is disrespectful is putting all the relentless work of AI researchers into the same pot you use to criticize capitalist interests.
I've been perfectly clear where I stand, you have been cherry picking definitions to suit your argument this entire thread. I have never conflated gen ai with corporate interests, you can see from my profile that I'm against chatbots of all types, open or closed weights, cloud or local. I am arguing against generative ai, all generative ai, as I have been doing for years. You are making excuses to avoid any self reflection about your chatbot use.