Reasonable Anti-AI Arguments
Edit: going through these slowly. It may take a while, but I do intend to address most comments.
A claim I see here frequently is that (edit: added "here" for clarity) "All Anti-AI arguments here have been debunked." Here's some arguments I believe have credence.
- Generative AI (LLMs and Stable Diffusion) Will Make Disinformation, Scams, and Misinformation Worse
Concession: Obviously, disinformation and misinformation have existed nearly as long as we've had information. But there's a difference between 10% of posts being government-sponsored disinformation and 35% of posts being government-sponsored disinformation. As people have acknowledged here repeatedly, it is difficult or impossible to tell reliably if a piece of text or an image is AI-generated. Even before, for photoshopped evidence, you could get experts in the courtroom to make cases about the veracity of evidence, but if there is no reasonable way to authenticate evidence, truth becomes much harder to ascertain. Users can interact with entire thriving ecosystems of "Minorities For Politician You Dislike" without realizing that every single one of them is fake. I could in a few hours create an army of bots participating in this community and spreading whatever ideology I wanted. Previously, that took way more time, and the bots were either way less convincing or really just people hired in disinformation farms.
- People Can Be Angry At Works Being Used For Things They Did Not Intend
This doesn't give people a legal right, but if someone puts something in the public domain, they're allowed to get angry if it's used to support something they dislike. Someone can create an original character, put them in the public domain, and then reasonably be angry if a radical group adopts them as a violent symbol. This actually does happen.
- AI May Lead to Massive Unemployment
Yes, every other instance of automation in the past has also led to unemployment. That does not make it a good thing. Yes, artists benefit from technologies that have caused other people to be unemployed. At worst, that makes them hypocrites, which does not invalidate their argument. Unemployment, in a world with scarcity, is a negative outcome for a large number of people. Thus, it isn't unreasonable to consider it when arguing whether or not a technology is "worth it."
- It Doesn't Matter if It Isn't Going Away
Computers aren't going away, but you can sure as heck still argue they've led to more harm than good. It's an argument I disagree with, but it is one.