I'm starting to get comments on Twitter on this thread. Comments like "But why is using genA/I so bad/harmful?"
It's plagiarism and based on exploitation. The tech also consumes massive amounts of energy & is environmentally destructive. It also accelerates the spread of dangerous disinformation.
It's almost like trying to explain to meat-eaters that it's (environmentally and morally) better to eat plant-based "meat" or just less meat in general.
"Surely I wouldn't make a difference. I can just continue using the bad system that caters to me and exploits others."
That being said, I do not know if I have the mental bandwidth or energy to reply to these people. Please educate yourselves and do some research on your own if this topic is new to you.
Well summarized!
And those integrating GenAI in their processes will have a rude surprise once the venture capitalists jack up the access price to cover the real operation costs.
So an extra argument is: avoid lock-in! It doesn't run on your own machine? It can go away anytime.
I feel like there will be a never ending supply of people not understanding why it's bad. One of these days I'm going to write up a full blog post with every source I have and just link to it.
Having commissioned like a dozen or more book covers (when I don't just buy a stock photo) it also doesn't actually get you what you want. As a writer trying to convey what I want, an AI cover would probably capture the wrong camera angle or body language. I can do a stick figure and convey it.
And it’s also going to make things so STAGNANT. It blows my mind that people would want anything artistic (book, movie, image, etc) without someone’s passion behind it.