The current world state.

Every time I see something like this I'm reminded of Plato recording Socrates' whinging that books are destroying society and no one can remember anything anymore.

- The gods confound the man who first found out how to distinguish hours! Confound him too, who in this place set up a sundial to cut and hack my days so wretchedly into small portions!
  Plautus, 250 BC

Im14AndThisIsDeep

I literally cannot believe how much this says about society
- This one really makes ya think
- We live in a society!

Ahhh yes, the old "reading on paper is big brain individual, reading on phone is mindless."

Same with "communicating over the internet isn't real communication."
I'm not saying that there aren't problems with how much we're communicating over the internet and how little we're communicating in real life, but the vast majority of humans in history would have considered the ability to send text messages to someone on the other side of the world in less than a second to be reserved for the gods above.
- For real! This is like saying "telegrams are destroying our youth" back in the day.
  Sure, real human interaction has value, but the ability to text someone on the other side of the planet instantly and have it translated is a huge leap forward not brain rot.
You saw a collection of trees, but not the forest, eh?

I'm 14 and this is deep

DAE phones bad?

AI has the free time to study and be artistic. Not us. We must pay to exist.

What rent does the AI pay? Nothing.

No internet bill, no transportation bill, no phone bill, no food bill, no Healthcare/insurance bill.

AI also isn't studying or being artistic. It has no real awareness of the concepts it's seemingly learning, at least not yet. AI as of right now is basically just statistical analysis of human-made information and art and predictive modelling of how a human might respond to a given prompt.
- AI as of right now
  AI for the forseeable future
  No need to mince words. Far too much of this terrible hype surrounding it is built on pure speculation of a future that we have no hard evidence is approaching. Just bold claims by people financially invested in selling the hype.
Someday, if it can sustain itself, it would need to pay for a living.
Right now, someone wants to have an AI. The person pays for it like a pet. But its too expensive, so it needs to give something in return.
We will see if it really benefited the energy costs and internet costs for those Companies who use intense amount of resources for AI.
internet and housing do cost money for those running the model, as does the "food" (electricity). healthcare is achieved by taking it behind the barn, transportation is unnecessary, as are phones.

im[$USER_AGE]andthisisdeep

Phone bad!!!!

It's not like the machines understand what they are reading.

Not yet

everyone keep focussing on the using phone part and missed the part where the humans are still doing menial labor while the robots are doing what people would do to enjoy themselves.

while the robots are doing what people would do to enjoy themselves.
and for the specific purpose of increasing profit margins of media companies who no longer have to pay artists and writers
If generative AI was merely a computer science endeavour, the 1% wouldn't be investing this heavily in it.

But you can read on your phone

You could. But instead you're doomscrolling on the fediverse.
- sounds to me like they're actually hopeposting, which is the opposite of doomscrolling
- In my, and I'd say most of our defense, I do learn a lot on here. And I'm not on here anywhere near as much as I was on Reddit.

whos the artist?

EDIT: Thanks for adding the source to the body! To everyone else: https://mastodon.social/@sohel9320/113312549620891784

sohel9320@mastodon.social

Pictured

Need input!

This doesn't need to be picked part to be appreciated

ai has stolen the artists' job, now we must do what it can't do: good art.

We are training AI so they can "draw" Wow!!!!

Fuck, i'm a robot?

i read books on my phone, i'm silly 😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭

Well being the driver You are the one responsible for not hitting the pedestrian. So speeding next to a pedestrian at night makes you an asshole.
- it drives me insane when people argue that unprotected trafficants (translated from the swedish term because lazy) doing something wrong absolves drivers of all guilt, motherfucker the law very clearly states that it's illegal to hurt people, context does not matter and if there is something you could have reasonably done to prevent or lessen the damage you are legally obliged to do it.
Physics Quiz:
Annoying Anne is driving through a residential area at exactly the limit of 20 mph.
A child jumps into the street.
Anne reacts as fast as humanly possible and manages to stop the car right before she'd hit the child.
Normal Norman is driving through the same residential area at 25 mph, just 5mph over the limit.
A child jumps into the street at the exact same distance as before.
Norman reacts exactly as fast as Anne, and has the same car, tires and brakes.
How fast will Norman's car be when he hits the child?
- Human reaction time is ~0.25 seconds.
  At 20 mph, you're going ~29 ft per second, so you go ~7.3 ft before you can react.
  At 25 mph, that's ~37 ft per second, so ~9.2 ft before you can react.
  The internet says a good car can break at about 15 f/s^2.
  At 29 f/s, that comes out to a stopping distance of ~28 ft.
  At 37 f/s, that's ~46 ft.
  So Anne, who's annoying for some reason, needs a total of ~35 ft to stop just before hitting the child.
  Norman needs ~9 ft to start decelerating, so by the time he reaches the 35 ft mark (after ~26 ft of hitting the brakes,) it's been a total of ~0.98 seconds, and he is going ~26 f/s, which is ~18 miles per hour.

Can't stop the developing, but i miss old time sometimes