this post was submitted on 31 Jul 2025
26 points (93.3% liked)

Asklemmy

49874 readers
350 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy ๐Ÿ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Thinking specifically about AI here: if a process does not give a consistent or predictable output (and cannot reliably replace work done by humans) then can it really be considered "automation"?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 week ago

I said from the consumer's point of view, it doesn't matter unless the process is the commodity, ie art. I said that if the process isn't the commodity, then from the consumer's perspective, they are roughly equivalent if both are identical end-products.

From the laborer's point of view, throwing a few prompts into an LLM is hardly an expression of artistry, art has use-value when the medium is intimately grappled with as a form of expression, whatever form that may be. If the laborer is just trying to show a floor plan, for example, they don't need to draw it by hand, the information is the goal. AI is fine if advanced enough to help with that.

That's why it's important to correctly analyze tools, their limitations, and where they could have potential use, rather than insisting on avoiding tool usage for not making us "struggle" as hard.