- Teetotalers: alcohol vegans.
- Straight edgers: drug vegans.
- Recycling: waste vegans.
- Solar power: power vegans.
The possibilities are infinite if you are a netaphor vegan.
Carnivores: vegetable vegans.
And jus lik that we come full circle 😂
Brilliant lol
This works so well specially for those people that refuse to touch anything “not cooked” in their plate or that is green.
- Working class: retirement vegan
- American: healthcare vegan
- German: humour vegan
My god, it’s unstoppable
- Republican: democracy vegan, justice vegan, decency vegan, consent vegan
Not trafficking children vegan
Age of majority vegan
I love your profile image. I should reread Rice Boy.
High five, fuck yes. Cool person detected. I think you’re the first one to spot it, too.
I wish I had that series in print. Might be time to look into that
Ooh, print would be amazing. $30 for the softcover, wonder about shipping though…
I have to believe you’re underestimating how recognizable TOE is.It’s a hard one to gauge for me. I’m pretty sure I found it via stumbleupon back when that was really great. I read the whole thing in close to one go, and I never hear anyone else talk about it.
stumbleupon, wow… That takes me back.
- Amish: techno vegans
- Mennonite: techno vegetarians
I interpreted that as techno, as in the genre, for too long.
Incels: sexual vegans
I keep trying to eat meat but it just won’t cooperate!
Freeze! Vegan police!
Chicken’s not vegan?
It’s like taking the last syllable of the name of the hotel and tacking it onto every scandal, because you didn’t understand that it’s part of the name of a hotel, and not some sort of indicator of scandal.
The worst was the Col scandal.
(Sorry. So sorry)
Please see yourself out
You’re hereby invited to /c/vegan, as you appear to be a Northern Hemisphere vegan.
netaphor vegan
Found an autocorrect vegan!
In my most upvoted comment. I’m hating that typo so much.
I mean “Straight edgers” is on the same level already
Recycling: waste vegans.
The Germans are probably upset with this comparison
What for a nonsense. Do these other countries not sort their waste or what? Do they not know about efficiency? Next thing you’re going to tell me they don’t sort their white, green and brown glass separately.
It’s quite common for me to be annoyed, angry, or upset at a headline writer. Then there’s the feeling I got reading “Meet the AI vegans.”
Whole new level.
That’s because the author seems to be a journalism vegan, writing vegan and self-awareness vegan.
Its so wacky out there. When I read something like this I’m sure its The Onion. And its not. Then I read a headline about US politics and its totally believable , alas its The Onion.
I refuse to believe this title is anything other than engagement-bait, personally.
Seems to me you‘re a BS vegan.
Yeah, pretty disappointing to see from the Guardian.
You’d be surprised how much more serene your headspace can become if you stop expecting anything beyond stupidity, incompetence and negligence as the default human behavior.
This is such a stupid name for this.
Calling them after a maligned (if harmless) group seems like a choice to paint refusing to use AI as being annoying, preachy and scorn-worthy.
They seem very determined to pressure people into using AI regardless of it’s practicality, environmental impact, or anything. Fuck this shit.
There’s been recent pushes in that regard, investment in AI shit has been enormous but the financial payoff for anyone besides hardware manufacturers remains nonexistent. So investors and corporations have recently redoubled their efforts into trying to get everyone to use it in the hopes that this somehow will make them profitable.
Abstaining from a thing does not make one a vegan. That’s not how any of this works.
I’m sex vegan. Cry about it virgins
No mayo in the bedroom? Why even bother.
Vegan aioli just doesn’t cut it
I’m a sex vegetarian gotta be a bit open
I’m a sex pescatarian. I will not be answering questions.
Sex flexitarian is where it’s at
No animals harmed during sex…hmm
Disagreed. I am an animal.
It only counts when it’s voluntary, tho.
“Vegan sex” is actually a different thing. It’s penetration but you stop before you cum.
If the human you’re fucking consented, then consuming their fluids is vegan. Hell if they consent, eating them would be vegan too.
Animals do not consent to having fluids extracted or their lives taken and flesh consumed. Animal agriculture keeps animals in filthy, torturous conditions too, which no animal would ever consent to either.
I had a fish that died by suicide. We didn’t eat it, but arguably
It was kept in captivity by you though, which is not it’s natural habitat so any choices it made were, arguably, under duress.
If you lived by a creek and regularly recognised a fish swimming by, and one day this fish killed itself in front of you- you still shouldn’t eat it as fish contain a lot of parasites and there’s very likely also something toxic in the water causing the fish to harm itself this way.
But yeah, sure, hypothetically: if for a year or so you knew a wild fish that lived in an unpolluted and ecologically healthy body of water, and one day this fish chose to kill itself in front of you. You could, if you really wanted to eat a suicidal fish, eat the fish and say it was vegan because the only harm that came to the fish was through the un-coerced choices of said suicidal fish.
It’s like how they put the word gate after something to say that it is a scandal involving the former word.
Somesort of political scandal involving road maintenance? Oh yes well that’s roadgate then. Even though the Watergate scandal was in fact it scandal in the watergate hotel, rather than a scandal about water.
Someday we’ll have Gate gate, or maybe even another scandal at the Watergate complex, so Watergate gate.
I can’t wait!
Awe so the article author has a vendetta against vegans got it.
But it makes people come off as extremely annoying. So that’s working.
I mean, abstaining from animal products makes someone a vegan, right? If you abstain from AI products then it would follow that you’re an “AI vegan”.
It follows, but it is also feels like click bait.
A definition of vegan is:
A vegetarian who eats plant products only, especially one who uses no products derived from animals, as fur or leather.
There is an environmental parallel, and it made me read the article to see what they were on about – so I guess it worked.
To be clear, I am very pro environment (I live in it); I just feel like this is crossing the streams of related, but completely different movements, isn’t particularly helpful.
Abstaining from animal products is just vegetarian. Veganism requires an extremely strict adherence to a very specific set of rules concerning animals.
Vegetarians can eat cheese, which is an animal product.
“Have you ever been called an AI vegan?”
“No… Shit no! I believe saying something like that’d get your ass kicked!”
“Newspaper which uses AI to write its articles concocts derogatory term for people who doesn’t use AI”
This makes about as much sense as calling Linux users “Windows vegans”.
Choosing to not use AI isn’t some wacky contrarian position, it’s a tame position that can easily be justified. (Don’t want to use AI? Then don’t.) If anything, trying to assert that constantly using AI for everything would be the new normal is the wacky position.
It’s not cool to use “vegan” like this.
It’s like vegangate or something.
Got a good chuckle out of me tho
People just going about their business living their lives as they have for many years…
Silicon Valley: Hey fuck you. Also I came up with a dumb nickname for you.
i wonder if they came up with such term to mock those who dont want to use ai and possibly actual vegans on the side.
They use to mock us with “Luddite” but the Technologists looked into that actual movement (rather than the caricature) and agreed, “yeah sure, like them”. That took the sting out of the pejorative, so they picked another mocked group to connect it with.
Maybe we should be more like the luddites, starting with data centers.
The luddites wooden shoes are not all that different from the folk that put zip bombs and other tarpits on their websites to break the crawlers.
And here i am not using it because I’m old and cranky.
I just don’t use it because it’s shit and doesn’t do anything I need any better than I can do myself in the same time.
“Hey why don’t you use this tool you don’t need? It does the thing worse than you do and also fucks up the planet in the process!”
I refuse to use it because it’s shit.
We are not the same.
Yup, these things are still garbage for >90% of all applications people are jamming them into. Breathed a sigh of relief when my company CEO said he doesn’t see us using AI for more than can center routing for at least the next several years.
Works relatively well for image editing
Else yea I would agree, sometimes it’s just shoved for nothing, but 90% seems like too much
Every last bit of it? What is your stance on use of AI for tasks such as data analysis of massive sets for scientific research, or procedural automation of massive operations?
*because you don’t know how to use it
I don’t use A.I. because I’ve had nothing but negative interactions with A.I. Customer service bots that fail to give adequate responses, unhelpful and incorrect search result summaries, and, “art,” that looks like shit hasn’t made me want to sign up for ChatGPT or Gemini. For most people, this isn’t a moral stance, it’s just that the product isn’t worth paying for. Stop framing people that don’t use A.I. as luddites with an ax to grind just because tech bros spent billions on a product that isn’t good yet.
It’s fair to say that the environmental and ethical concerns are significant and I wouldn’t look down in anyone refusing to use AI for those reasons. I don’t look down on vegetarians or vegans either - I don’t have to agree with someone’s moral stance or choices to respect them.
But you’re right, LLMs are full of crap.
LLMs definitely are full of crap. But that isn’t the point of them (even if some corporations make it seem like it is)
They are supposed to be used for text generation. And you are supposed to read through everything afterwards to correct any hallucinations.
It can’t work on its own, and make mistakes about 30% of the time.
But there are use cases where that isn’t a problem. Use them as inspiration for creative writing prompts for example. They are crazy good at that.
Truth is definitely a bit of a blind spot for LLMs.
For most people, this isn’t a moral stance, it’s just that the product isn’t worth paying for.
Wait till you see the price of a burger in another five years.
Yea, it’s often really fucking cheap for the value, just like streaming services to an extent
Customer service AI sucks, I think we can all agree to this
But if you really believe that ChatGPT and Gemini is mainly for generating art, then you’re completely wrong
You only notice AI-generated content when it’s bad/obvious, but you’d never notice the AI-generated content that’s so good it’s indistinguishable from something generated by a human.
I don’t know what percentage of the “good” content we see is AI-generated, but it’s probably more than 0 and will probably go up over time.
Shit take, the more AI-made media is online, the harder it is for AI developing companies to improve on previous models.
It won’t be indistinguishable from media made with human effort, unless you enjoy wasting your time on cheap uninteresting manmade slop then you won’t be fooled by cheap uninteresting and untrue AI-made slop.
deleted by creator
the harder it is for AI developing companies to improve on previous models.
They all use each other’s data to improve. That’s federated learning!
In a way, it’s good because it helps have more competition
I was talking about ai training on ai output, ai requires genuine data, having a feedback loop makes models regress, see how ai makes yellow pictures because of the ghibli ai thing
Sure, that mainly applies when it’s the same model training on itself. If a model trains on a different one, it might retrieve some good features from it, but the bad sides as well
AI requires genuine data, period. Go read about it instead of spewing nonsense.
If they weren’t trained on the same data, it ends up similar
Training inferior models with superior models output can lower the gap between both. It’ll not be optimal by any means and you might fuck its future learning, but it will work to an extent
The data you feed it should be good quality though
Maybe, but that doesn’t change the fact that it was trained on stolen artwork and is being used to put artists out of work. I think that, and the environmental effect, are better arguments against AI than some subjective statement about whether or not it’s good.
I applaud folks like this - they make a choice and stick with it. No “I’ll never use AI to generate art but I vibe code to save time” hypocrisy. No “I use it to help me with maths, but I’d never use it to steal artistic work”.
Just straight up “it is an environmental hazard, it is unethical, not engaging”. Should be called “AI Ethicists” rather than “AI Vegans”.
Yeah, I too hate those hypcrites who complain about the massive environmental impact of AI, then drive a 10 mile round trip to buy a burger made from a cow raised on soy.
Would you happen to be a vegan who is also anti-car by any chance?
If so, I can recommend fuckcars on ml as they share your viewpoint.
No I’m a meat eater who is anti-car! I’m more getting at how people have latched on to the energy use of AI models without realising the huge energy usage that goes into their daily lives.
are the two comparable? genuinely asking because i suspect AI usage is an order of magnitude or so more…
You’re right that there’s orders of magnitude difference, but its the driving that’s far more! One query to a chatGPT type model uses roughly 1Wh of energy, which is about the same as is released in burning one droplet of gasoline.
Definitely a good point to raise; thanks for doing so!
Here’s a fun one - where do you stand on those forced to commute dur to housing prices near inner city work (e.g. I live in near poverty paying a mortgage for a small place near where I work due to poor public transport so I can walk to work - how does this figure into the anti-car vision? Is it an employer issue, a government issue, a personal sacrifice, or something else entirely?)
Its an urban planning and transport issue essentially. Medium density housing (think 4-6 story blocks) allows enough people to live in an area that it becomes feasible to have trams/light rail serving that area.
Good to know, I’ll go ask one if the profs in our school of built environment for more info. See if they can offer more insight there.
If you’re interested in this topic, I simply must plug the Adam Something YT channel :) He makes funny but also serious videos about urban and transport planning, and whatever new “trains but worse” transport idea techbros came up with this month.
Starting it with “AI” is already misleading. Whatever the noun is should be preceded by “Anti-AI.”
I dunno, the use of AI Ethicist fits as they’re not against the concept of generative AI as a whole, they’re against unethical generative AI (in terms of stolen training data and environmental harm).
If the world transitioned to a post-IP (intellectual property) society (as we need to), with AI eating less power, then AI Ethicists are unlikely to object.
Fair!
I’ve personally sworn off writing code with any if statements or static values, my webpages hallucinate differently on each refresh 💟
My desktop is a bit allergic to any art made my humans
— A.I. Vegan
