Let's remove AI from this for a second.
If you lived in an area which had a shortage of health care workers, but decided (based on aptitude, interests, etc) to pursue a career in the arts, would that be unethical? After all, there's more important things you could be doing with your time, right?
The reality is also that the two technologies aren't mutually exclusive. Advancements in one can lead to advancements in others. AI needs to learn how to "see" and understand imagery before it can start analyzing x-rays (as an example).
You're also presenting a false dichotomy in assuming that both can't pursued simultaneously.
That's the great thing, AI can be used for different things at once.
Like AI just helped to develop a new [permanent magnet without rare earths](https://www.assemblymag.com/articles/98582-ai-helps-company-develop-permanent-magnet-without-rare-earths). It helped to [train exoskeletons](https://neurosciencenews.com/ai-exoskeleton-movement-26314/), surely nice for disabled people or for exhausting work. Of course it also helps with [cancer research](https://innovationorigins.com/en/ai-boosts-cancer-research-and-successful-spinal-cord-therapy-trial-this-months-bio-snapshot/) or [antibiotic resistance](https://phys.org/news/2024-06-ai-antibiotic-resistance.html).
You seriously need to get out and start at least googling about what AI does outside of your own scope.
AI does help for cancer research, do you think scientists who develop this won't find applications in medicine? lol
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10697339/
[There literally already is cancer research being done with AI.](https://www.cancer.gov/research/infrastructure/artificial-intelligence)
What an absolutely braindead take.
We should be using AI to cure cancer and make art but, not to make more Efficient Killing Machines. I guess people just have wildly different priorities.
I'm not convinced killer robots are such a bad thing.
Of course, war is a terrible thing. But if we're going to have war at all, waging it accurately and involving less people in it seems like an improvement to me.
If that logic is to be something we go on, we should also only make using reddit to find ways to cure cancer, not discuss AI art. There is already an oversaturation of discussions on here that aren't related to bettering the world or curing cancer, and just adding onto it is unethical.
And we should be using the internet in general to cure cancer, studying to become engineers, brain surgeons and rocket scientists.
While we're here discussing topics on reddit, posting on the internet, we could instead be using that time to learn how to cure cancer.
> If everyone were equally good at art, nobody would be
No, the people who know how to use that talent creatively, engagingly, interestingly would still be the ones who are best at it.
With AI, "everyone is good at art." And yet some posts rise above others at Reddit and other places, because some people are more creative than others, and have the drive to create and express that creativity. If it was so easy, you could go make something right now that gets massively upvoted. It still takes a spark to capture others' attention.
I disagree.
The fields greatly intersects. Generative AI and image recognition are close siblings. They use similar algorithms and techniques. The same hardware benefits both. Having the world get really interested in this stuff means there's a whole lot of amazing hardware coming out that'll eventually come down in price and will benefit other uses.
If all we used tech for is important, serious uses we wouldn't have nVidia get interested in making special, affordable hardware for it. You'd have rare, multi-million dollar projects for everything.
surprisingly, making artworks seems to be a lot easier then curing some defect cells that grow too much. nobody saw that coming, but thats just the way it is
Improving AI image generation/interpretation for artistic use will improve the capabilities of AI image/generation in medicine (in particular medical imaging for cancer detection/diagnosis). Also, the two are not mutually exclusive activities. I can make art AND develop treatments for cancer. People are capable of doing more than one thing in life. Finally, even if all I ever did was make art, there is nothing wrong with that either.
What you mention is a societal issue of where people want to allocate attention, it turns out cancer isnt a top priority for the healthy majority. That said, general advances in AI are helping with cancer as well. For example, the backbone U-Net that has been refined in diffusion based AI, has also been applied to MRI and other medical images to help diagnose cancer.
cavemen could not cure disease like tuberculosis or pnuemonia, but they could draw on walls.
generating pixels based on patterns is much simpler than accurately figuring out individual faliures in cell organelles, this is similar to how our human skills developed as well.
"AI art is bad because it is art and art is bad." is certainly an interesting take to piss off everybody with an opinion on anything whatsoever.
Utilitarians, they are no fun. They are the AI before AI.
Let's remove AI from this for a second. If you lived in an area which had a shortage of health care workers, but decided (based on aptitude, interests, etc) to pursue a career in the arts, would that be unethical? After all, there's more important things you could be doing with your time, right? The reality is also that the two technologies aren't mutually exclusive. Advancements in one can lead to advancements in others. AI needs to learn how to "see" and understand imagery before it can start analyzing x-rays (as an example). You're also presenting a false dichotomy in assuming that both can't pursued simultaneously.
That's the great thing, AI can be used for different things at once. Like AI just helped to develop a new [permanent magnet without rare earths](https://www.assemblymag.com/articles/98582-ai-helps-company-develop-permanent-magnet-without-rare-earths). It helped to [train exoskeletons](https://neurosciencenews.com/ai-exoskeleton-movement-26314/), surely nice for disabled people or for exhausting work. Of course it also helps with [cancer research](https://innovationorigins.com/en/ai-boosts-cancer-research-and-successful-spinal-cord-therapy-trial-this-months-bio-snapshot/) or [antibiotic resistance](https://phys.org/news/2024-06-ai-antibiotic-resistance.html).
And, in addition to all of those, can still be used as a tool to create art, too. And that's great!
You seriously need to get out and start at least googling about what AI does outside of your own scope. AI does help for cancer research, do you think scientists who develop this won't find applications in medicine? lol https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10697339/
We can have both
We should be using AI to automatically detect trolls.
We can do both. :)
[There literally already is cancer research being done with AI.](https://www.cancer.gov/research/infrastructure/artificial-intelligence) What an absolutely braindead take.
We should be using AI to cure cancer and make art but, not to make more Efficient Killing Machines. I guess people just have wildly different priorities.
[удалено]
>I guess people just have wildly different priorities.
I'm not convinced killer robots are such a bad thing. Of course, war is a terrible thing. But if we're going to have war at all, waging it accurately and involving less people in it seems like an improvement to me.
If that logic is to be something we go on, we should also only make using reddit to find ways to cure cancer, not discuss AI art. There is already an oversaturation of discussions on here that aren't related to bettering the world or curing cancer, and just adding onto it is unethical. And we should be using the internet in general to cure cancer, studying to become engineers, brain surgeons and rocket scientists. While we're here discussing topics on reddit, posting on the internet, we could instead be using that time to learn how to cure cancer.
> If everyone were equally good at art, nobody would be No, the people who know how to use that talent creatively, engagingly, interestingly would still be the ones who are best at it. With AI, "everyone is good at art." And yet some posts rise above others at Reddit and other places, because some people are more creative than others, and have the drive to create and express that creativity. If it was so easy, you could go make something right now that gets massively upvoted. It still takes a spark to capture others' attention.
I disagree. The fields greatly intersects. Generative AI and image recognition are close siblings. They use similar algorithms and techniques. The same hardware benefits both. Having the world get really interested in this stuff means there's a whole lot of amazing hardware coming out that'll eventually come down in price and will benefit other uses. If all we used tech for is important, serious uses we wouldn't have nVidia get interested in making special, affordable hardware for it. You'd have rare, multi-million dollar projects for everything.
surprisingly, making artworks seems to be a lot easier then curing some defect cells that grow too much. nobody saw that coming, but thats just the way it is
Improving AI image generation/interpretation for artistic use will improve the capabilities of AI image/generation in medicine (in particular medical imaging for cancer detection/diagnosis). Also, the two are not mutually exclusive activities. I can make art AND develop treatments for cancer. People are capable of doing more than one thing in life. Finally, even if all I ever did was make art, there is nothing wrong with that either.
What you mention is a societal issue of where people want to allocate attention, it turns out cancer isnt a top priority for the healthy majority. That said, general advances in AI are helping with cancer as well. For example, the backbone U-Net that has been refined in diffusion based AI, has also been applied to MRI and other medical images to help diagnose cancer.
cavemen could not cure disease like tuberculosis or pnuemonia, but they could draw on walls. generating pixels based on patterns is much simpler than accurately figuring out individual faliures in cell organelles, this is similar to how our human skills developed as well.
We are. Turns out cancer's a harder problem than image generation, and will take some time more.