While these are incredibly good, it's sad to think about the unfathomable amount of abuse, spam, disinformation, manipulation and who know what other negatives these advancement are gonna cause. It was one thing when you could spot an AI image, but now and moving forward it's be basically increasingly futile to even try.

Almost all "human" interaction online will be subject to doubt soon enough.

Hard to be cheerful when technology will be a net negative overall even if it benefits some.

▲

signatoremo 4 days ago | parent [-]

By your logic email is clearly a net negative, given how much junk it generates - spam, phishing, hate mails, etc. Most of my emails at this point are spams.

▲

frfl 4 days ago | parent [-]

If we're talking objectively, yeah by definition if it's a net negative, it's a net negative. But we can both agree in absolute terms the negatives of email are manageable.

Hopefully you understand the sentiment of my original message, without getting into the semantics. AI advancement, like email when it arrived, are gonna turbocharge the negatives. Difference is in the magnitude of the problem. We're dealing with whole different scale we have never seen before.

Re: Most of my emails at this point are spams. - 99% of my emails are not spam. Yet AI spam is everywhere else I look online.

	▲	DrewADesign 4 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Their argument is false equivalence. You can’t just say “if you’re saying X is negative, you must believe that Y is negative because some of the negatives could be conceptually similar.” A good faith cost benefit analysis would rank both the cost and risks of an extremely accurate, cheap, on-demand commercial image generation service and an entirely open asynchronous worldwide text communication protocol, in different universes.
	▲	wiredpancake 4 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		[dead]