We should also be specific in what we oppose.

"Artificial Intelligence" is probably one of the broadest terms in common use today.

IMO, this is what we should oppose:

• Diffusion, tensor and GAN-based Image and video generation, no exceptions, they serve zero practical purpose
• Voice duplication, GAN-based voice generation is ok and is a good thing for accessibility
• Non-voice GAN-based audio generation
• Black box LLMs, LLMs can be genuinely useful tools but they HAVE to be trained ethically in a provable way that matches the OSI's definition of FLOSS

I might have missed some, but IMO, large language models and voice generation can be done ethically and are ok in very narrow contexts. Both of these are tools and should never be used as a final product.

I've stared at a few of these thus far, and I'm 99.9999% sure this is AI-generated.

It's more obvious on some graphics than others, but there's a lot of incoherence, the shadows make no sense and the window styling looks nothing like Windows.

This just screams of AI.

rofl

It's not safe and all that stuff.

I said provide your sources, don't put words in my mouth.

Not getting into this discussion, but next time, please provide your sources in the same comment where you make the claim.

EDIT: I've updated the rules, this comment is void and null.

Please cite your sources upon request, ideally in the reply where the claim is made but not necessarily. Citing your sources when making a claim is, however, recommended to avoid a Rule 8 violation, but will not be enforced.