Cross-posted from “If I can’t dance, it’s not my revolution” by @Db0@dbzer0.com in !dbzer0.com@dbzer0.com
I see tankies keep trying to argue with people about “Actually Existing Socialist” states like USSR and China and try to argue with me or others about how “they were good actually”. It’s bad enough when most of their arguments are whataboutism, but it grinds my gears when I hear then prattle on about all the statistically significant material improvements the life of the people received. It’s like listening to a terminally-liberal prattle on about how “statistically, the life quality actually increased under capitalism”.
Why is this bothering me so much? Because tankies completely suppress the freedom aspects of those states. Sure the improvements in life quality in those nations improved compared to the feudal/agrarian societies they had before, much like liberal capitalism also improved those same metrics.
But the freedom of the populace barely improved improved whatsoever because that freedom is anathema to authoritarian regimes. When anarchists talk about our ideal society, we mean both positive and negative freedom together together. It’s not enough if your health expectancy is increased and infant mortality is reduced, if you have to constantly fear the secret police knocking on your door. It’s not enough to have food on your plate, when the state determines what you can create and where you can work. It’s not enough to get a free car and internet, if your family member got shipped to the concentration camp for criticizing the movement leaders online.
Tankies explicitly avoid this. They are desperate to argue that “authoritarianism is not a thing actually”, hilariously and endlessly promoting the worst socialist essay ever written to justify this. But authoritarianism is very much the crux of the problem here. A society with a hierarchical structure like capitalism or marxism-leninism (i.e. state capitalism) can never be good. It might be better than other states, but it will only get worse and worse as power concentrates to fewer hands and the grip of authority tightens the more control slips through their fingers.
We keep seeing this historically both in liberal and ML states. Clearly material quality of life is not enough to justify the system, or even be stable long-term, when actual human liberty is the sacrifice for it.
- Orvorn ( @orvorn@slrpnk.net ) 10•2 days ago
Keep your AI shit out of anarchist spaces.
- within_epsilon ( @within_epsilon@beehaw.org ) 2•13 hours ago
How is this not equivalent to “don’t use shovels, dig with your hands”? Gatekeeping technology… so anarchist. /s
Oh fuck off.
- Orvorn ( @orvorn@slrpnk.net ) 8•2 days ago
I don’t give a shit about copyright but I do care about the environment and about culture, and GenAI is bad for both. It didn’t democratize art, it enshitified it. You should be fucking ashamed for using that corpo ancap bullshit.
My local gens don’t harm the environment and the image I create for my blog posts doesn’t harm culture. Get some perspective.
- poVoq ( @poVoq@slrpnk.net ) 12•2 days ago
Ok, lets take a step back please before the name calling and insults continues.
This AI image was almost certainly created with AI Horde (the OP is the main developer of it), which despite some general issues with how the model was trained, is about the closest to democratized and relatively environmentally benign AI image generation as it can get. Feel free to still dislike it, but you are directing your anger at the wrong person.
- TʜᴇʀᴀᴘʏGⒶʀʏ ( @TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone ) 11•2 days ago
Lmao you’re talking to the very person who hosts this anarchist space
- araneae ( @araneae@beehaw.org ) 8•2 days ago
I wholeheartedly agree with you and wish this post had gone better for you but it has to be said your point was obliterated by your obstinate defense of your complimentary AI image. Clearly people do not agree with your stance that your AI, though locally grown, open source, and energy efficient, is not in theory stealing. In my opinion, unfortunately, it sort of is stealing unless you source the input data yourself. I read somewhere in the thread you possibly did source your own data and thats really cool if so. But I think that it just goes to show that at least on Lemmy your receptive audience just… doesn’t like AI art in principle. I’ll say it universally looks groddy to me and I had the same gut reaction to seeing the art even though I like what it depicts and love the message (and title!).
Another thing is… Know your audience. The premise of this thread already means you were going to be engaging with prickly Marxist-Leninists to begin with… Since they do practice whatabohtism as you stated, they just need a thing to dig into to discredit you, and you sort of gave it to them. Not saying you have to be the perfect flawless diplomat with how you comport yourself online (god knows I’m not) but to an audience who aren’t receptive anyway your defense of your practices while not broadly clarifying the source of your training data is just going to lead them to thinking of you as a reactionary in favor of art regurgitation, indicating you are more about your aesthetic than your message. I think you have pirate party politics and I respect the long term vision of a world without constraints on how art is shared and understood, but this specific tool we’re discussing requires far more attention than not in order to be wielded ethically. People are gunshy just seeing it, even if theoretically they don’t know what you’re showing them is a home made original piece with original constituent data.
You can’t really wear a big hat on the internet that says ASK ME ABOUT MY ETHICAL OPEN SOURCE AI but perhaps you could have user flair in your nametag. On your blog you could caption your art with a disclaimer and a github link to the resources you use/used to build it.
There’s no argument I can make towards the GenAI haters that will work. This is a situation where people have dug in their heels about their position and see neither arguments nor nuance.
I don’t particularly care if some people dislike the disposable art I use for my blog. I also don’t think “people disagree” with my use of GenAI. It’s a few ones that do but they’re very loud when they do. Most other don’t give a fuck about it either way.
I understand that moralizers won’t like how I work, but I’m used to hear these bad faith arguments from anti-pirates for decades now. I’m used to it.
- inv3r5ion ( @inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com ) English3•2 days ago
“Disposable art” see, you’re telling on yourself about how you view art and artists. There’s a reason people aren’t a fan of this even if you’re doing it as “ethically” as possible.
Mate are you trying to be as uncharitable as possible to get upset? , I didn’t call your art or all art disposable. Cheezus crust…
- inv3r5ion ( @inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com ) English3•2 days ago
It’s not my art. It’s how you view art in general as “disposable”.
I don’t view art in general as disposable. I view this specific piece of art for this specific blogpost as disposable. Stop being uncharitable ffs!
- araneae ( @araneae@beehaw.org ) 2•2 days ago
They said the artistic output was disposable not the input. Whether that matters is up fot debate.
- inv3r5ion ( @inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com ) English7•2 days ago
This is AI garbage
- TʜᴇʀᴀᴘʏGⒶʀʏ ( @TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone ) 14•2 days ago
The image is generated with AI (and isn’t done very well), but the blog post has nothing to do with that. Its just nice to have a pic to go with your blog post, and using AI is a quick and easy way to make sure it’s both unique and copyright-free
Edit: also, I feel it’s worth pointing out, you’re commenting on a blog post by db0, from an account made on db0’s instance, and db0 is the main developer of AIHorde, an open source genAI project
- inv3r5ion ( @inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com ) English7•2 days ago
The words that go with it are fine, the AI image is a waste of energy and water, offensive to actual artists, and AI is just theft of artists work as “training” data.
That’s not what “theft” means
- inv3r5ion ( @inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com ) English3•2 days ago
The imagery used for the training data isn’t licensed to be used as such. It’s stolen.
Not what “stealing” means either. Also I will point out this instance is both pro-piracy and pro-genai and we shit on copyrights
- inv3r5ion ( @inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com ) English4•2 days ago
Stealing from big companies like movie studios? Whatever. Stealing from the working class? Not so great. People should 1. Have the right to not have their work used as training data and 2. If they agree to be used as training data, be compensated.
Again, not what “stealing” means. And I don’t recognize anyone’s rights to tell me what I can do with the content they’re sharing with me. Copyrights is a shitty state monopoly, not a natural law.
- GBU_28 ( @GBU_28@lemm.ee ) English2•2 days ago
Rut roh gaming piracy
- TʜᴇʀᴀᴘʏGⒶʀʏ ( @TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone ) 3•2 days ago
It looks like it was generated with flux, and was probably generated locally, using less electricity than most modern video games (flux is very energy efficient and fast).
I’m not well equipped to discuss the theft part of it, but I don’t think it’s fair to call it theft (and I’ll say upfront I’m not prepared to defend that opinion lol)
Edit: regarding the ‘actual artists’ part- some people use generative AI to make ‘actual art’ and are themselves artists
- inv3r5ion ( @inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com ) English6•2 days ago
As an artist, the training data used for most of the image generators is stolen work. As in, the original artists didn’t give permission for their work to be used that way. Some aren’t stolen, such as adobe’s ai tools, which are trained on imagery that’s licensed for it.
- hemko ( @hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com ) English1•16 hours ago
Piracy is a big theme in this instance
Lol at you promoting corporate Adobe and attacking those use local open source genai. You’re a goddamn tool!
- inv3r5ion ( @inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com ) English3•2 days ago
Don’t get me wrong I hate adobe. But. They at least got AI right. These aren’t big corporations you’re “stealing” movies from. They’re everyday people like myself who’s art is being used by AI for training against my wishes.
I ain’t stealing shit. Nothing I do takes anything away from you. And you’re a tool because you think what adobe is doing is “right”. Because you have no understanding of capitalist power differentials. As if it wouldn’t be a massively worst world for Artists if the only owner of GenAI was adobe and everyone was paying adobe only to use GenAI.
dafuq are you talking about?
- inv3r5ion ( @inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com ) English1•2 days ago
The “art” that goes along with the writing (not the writing itself which I assume is your actual writing)
- GBU_28 ( @GBU_28@lemm.ee ) English1•2 days ago
This is hilarious. Nice post, well argued