I offer Cassandra's Complete Class Theorem¹.
All "good use cases for AI" break down into one of four categories:
I. Bad use case.
II. Good use case, but not something AI can do.
III Good use case, but it's already been done without AI.
IV. Not AI in the LLMs and GANs sense, but in the sense of machine learning, statistical inference, or other similarly valid things AI boosters use to shield from critique.
https://wandering.shop/@xgranade/115766140296237983
___
¹Not actually a theorem.
Category V: cryptids
This is a very good point, and something I need to keep at the front of my mind. Even if there was somehow a magic use case for LLMs and other AI bullshit machines, that would not justify:
• Making fascists rich.
• Displacing labor rights.
• Fucking over the environment.
• Enclosing culture behind corporate ownership.
• Giving fascists a giant disinfo machine.
@xgranade the drum I’m banging is that there is no use case that could be valid enough, even if you were wrong, to justify its harms, so this conversation is ultimately irrelevant
I reserve the right to, if you're acting like an AI booster within my social media light cone, point out which of these four categories your One Good Use Case falls into.
I had to add Category IV in my self quoot to cover that boosters kept showing up and claiming that things that have been done for years and years are evidence of why LLMs and image-generation GANs are useful. You know, the same ol' bait and switch I pointed out the other day.
