#Ethics in AI Usage

[ai-for-psychologists]

Artificial Intelligence for Psychologists – Practical Use.

Discover how Artificial Intelligence in psychology is transforming with accurate diagnoses, administrative automation, and innovative therapies. Learn more about practical applications and ethical considerations. learn more

[thefandombringer]

thank you @lesbian-mike-wheeler for inspiring this because

guys you can’t make ts up

[terranimbus]

ok but u dont have to do this...u dont need it u really dont no one needs this u've been making games for how many years? you DO NOT NEED TO USE AI REGARDLESS OF IF ITS GONNA BE IN THE GOD DANG GAME OR NOT

AND IM SPEAKING PURELY ON GEN AI DO NOT COME WITH THE "well this kind of ai has been-" SHUSH!!!

[amberinn]

The devil is tempting me to go on c.ai again, and it's fucked up, because I'm 17 so I can't even ASK anyone if they known of any good lesbian porn fanfiction with blood and biting involved

[ghoststellar]

>> Also does anyone have a muse interest tracker that doesn't involve Google, Microsoft or AI services?

[steampoweredskeleton]

Possibly my most annoying trait is that when ppl suggest using MORE generative image/video AI in meetings, I WILL bring up the environmental impact and innocently ask whether we report our carbon footprint and water usage in terms of tools (I know we do)

[jcmarchi]

Only 2.1% avoided generative AI in 2024: Find out why

New Post has been published on https://thedigitalinsider.com/only-2-1-avoided-generative-ai-in-2024-find-out-why/

Only 2.1% avoided generative AI in 2024: Find out why

This year, only 2.1% of respondents in our Generative AI Report said they don’t use generative AI tools; this represented a decline from last year’s value of 11.8%, and we were interested in knowing what was behind this choice and this drop.

This significant drop suggests a variety of important underlying factors, such as increased awareness and understanding, broader accessibility, proven effectiveness and ROI, peer influence and industry trends, the evolution of technology, and cultural and organizational shifts.

ChatGPT

OV

Matlab

Ansys

Gemini

LLama

Midjourney

Create our own internally – 33.4%

Lack of interest – 33.3% 

Irrelevance – 33.3%

There was an even distribution of why respondents said they don’t use generative AI.

The choice to develop AI tools internally could mean there’s a preference for using customized solutions tailored to the specific business. This can be driven by worries over control or wanting to keep proprietary systems. 

Respondents also indicated a lack of interest as a reason for not adopting external generative AI tools. Potentially originating from a perceived lack of clear advantage or understanding of how these tools could benefit their specific operations, this decision points to a possible gap in awareness. 

Similarly, there’s a perception that generative AI tools are irrelevant to operations, meaning there could be a disconnect between AI technologies’ offerings and potential users’ needs or understandings. 

With all non-users of generative AI stating they’d be willing to use the tools in the future, this points to essential insights about perceptions and the evolution of technologies.

Generative AI tools are being broadly accepted and have a positive outlook, meaning they’ve proven their value and have managed to convince even previously hesitant individuals or companies of their potential benefits. 

There’s also a marked potential for widespread implementation of these tools across more varied sectors and tools as more non-users adopt the technology. We might see generative AI even more extensively integrated into business operations, potentially leading to a new wave of digital transformation.

Generative AI 2024: Key insights & emerging trends

Download the Generative AI 2024 Report for in-depth analysis on top tools, user benefits, and key challenges shaping the future of AI technology.

The respondents highlighted the tools below as ones they’d consider using:

Task-dependent

LLaMa3

Matlab

OV

Ansys

The general consensus about the use of generative AI 

We wanted to know the opinion of the respondents’ companies about generative AI. 

For – 33.3%

Neutral – 66.7%

The majority of respondents (66.6%) indicated that their companies hold a neutral opinion about generative AI, with some (33.3%) also stating that their company has a favorable outlook.

The prevalence of this neutral view could suggest that many companies are still assessing the potential impacts and benefits of generative AI without yet committing fully to its adoption. 

Similarly to last year, there’s an absence of opposition, implying a potential open-minded attitude about generative AI and perhaps even its future adoption.

We wanted to know how much those who don’t use the technology trust it. Perhaps surprisingly, not everyone who said they’d use the technology in the future also said they trusted it.

Yes – 72.8%

No – 27.2%

The level of trust (72.8%) in generative AI tools remained the same as last year, continuing the trend of not everyone who said they’d use the technology in the future also trusting it.

Mostly positive – 33.3%

Mixed – 66.7%

The majority of respondents (66.7%) see the impact of the tools as mixed, which could suggest a nuanced understanding of the technology’s benefits against its challenges. This view could stem from the awareness that, while driving innovation and efficiency, generative AI has the potential to pose risks in ethics and bias.

How do you envision the role of generative AI evolving in your industry?

All non-users of generative AI view its role as a supplementary tool, which could underline that while having its uses, it’s not vital for core business operations. This could point to an opportunity for developers to educate and demonstrate AI’s broad benefits and capabilities.

Potential misuse of personal/generated data – 33.4%

Lack of transparency in data usage – 33.3%

Other – 33.3%

Potential misuse of personal/generated data and lack of transparency in data usage are equal concerns for non-users of the technology. It could indicate the fear of personal data being mishandled by AI systems or third parties.

How data is used also needs to be fully addressed; transparency over how data is used, handled, and stored by AI systems needs strong policies and regulations on data governance, which need to be properly communicated by AI providers.

Those who answered ‘other’ didn’t specify.

Download the full report to see why and how end users and practitioners are using generative AI tools.

[bob3160]

AI - A Doubl-Edged Sword

[noctiilio]

heya, just to say i'll be taking a quick break from Touhou. I'm not sure how talked about it is on tumblr, but Touhou 20 has Generative AI used in Adobe Firefly for the backgrounds. I was already bummed by it, but seeing people's reactions being a bunch of changing mental gymnastics to excuse it or make it seem less bad is not it. Especially with a lukewarm thread making its way on socials to "document" this by someone who DID use AI in the past and doesn't mind its usage. While it's true that ZUN always relied on stock images for his backgrounds, the excuse that "he didnt know any better/it was an accident" has been debunked. now, people are using the excuse of "adobe firefly is ethical, actually". it's not! Firefly is half adobe assets like they claim they are, and half trained on midjourney, which, you know, is NOT a closed circuit and therefore NOT as ethical as it claims to be. Besides, "ethical" or not, it's still encouraging and endorsing the usage of generative imagery since ZUN is so influencial. Monkey see, monkey do. Others that follow his lead might not be as "ethical" as he says he is when they do it in their own turn. I've even seen people claim that it's "no different from him ripping off other series for his pc98 cast" which is a VERY wild and bold take to make in order to make it seem normal and misses the point. I don't want to dunk on ZUN or get the pitchforks out. I am being vocal BECAUSE touhou means so much to me and I want the best for the series i considered to be so rich and unique for all those years. And I don't think regarding ZUN as an unproblematic saint who isn't accountable for anything ever at all is a good stance. I just need this to sink in for me and to swallow that pill bc to say i'm disappointed, both in ZUN and in fans excusing this with rapidly changing alibis, is frankly not it.

I'm tired of fighting. I don't want to spark any drama but I am exhausted. Keep supporting your artists, keep fighting against the rise of AI and do not let it be normalized, even by people you look up to. I will always have my favorites very dear in my heart and it doesn't take away from them, if that's what you were wondering, but I need some time to swallow that pill. Thank you.

[are-we-art-yet]

Is AWAY using it's own program or is this just a voluntary list of guidelines for people using programs like DALL-E? How does AWAY address the environmental concerns of how the companies making those AI programs conduct themselves (energy consumption, exploiting impoverished areas for cheap electricity, destruction of the environment to rapidly build and get the components for data centers etc.)? Are members of AWAY encouraged to contact their gov representatives about IP theft by AI apps?

What is AWAY and how does it work?

AWAY does not "use its own program" in the software sense—rather, we're a diverse collective of ~1000 members that each have their own varying workflows and approaches to art. While some members do use AI as one tool among many, most of the people in the server are actually traditional artists who don't use AI at all, yet are still interested in ethical approaches to new technologies.

Our code of ethics is a set of voluntary guidelines that members agree to follow upon joining. These emphasize ethical AI approaches, (preferably open-source models that can run locally), respecting artists who oppose AI by not training styles on their art, and refusing to use AI to undercut other artists or work for corporations that similarly exploit creative labor.

Environmental Impact in Context

It's important to place environmental concerns about AI in the context of our broader extractive, industrialized society, where there are virtually no "clean" solutions:

The water usage figures for AI data centers (200-740 million liters annually) represent roughly 0.00013% of total U.S. water usage. This is a small fraction compared to industrial agriculture or manufacturing—for example, golf course irrigation alone in the U.S. consumes approximately 2.08 billion gallons of water per day, or about 7.87 trillion liters annually. This makes AI's water usage about 0.01% of just golf course irrigation.

Looking into individual usage, the average American consumes about 26.8 kg of beef annually, which takes around 1,608 megajoules (MJ) of energy to produce. Making 10 ChatGPT queries daily for an entire year (3,650 queries) consumes just 38.1 MJ—about 42 times less energy than eating beef. In fact, a single quarter-pound beef patty takes 651 times more energy to produce than a single AI query.

Overall, power usage specific to AI represents just 4% of total data center power consumption, which itself is a small fraction of global energy usage. Current annual energy usage for data centers is roughly 9-15 TWh globally—comparable to producing a relatively small number of vehicles.

The consumer environmentalism narrative around technology often ignores how imperial exploitation pushes environmental costs onto the Global South. The rare earth minerals needed for computing hardware, the cheap labor for manufacturing, and the toxic waste from electronics disposal disproportionately burden developing nations, while the benefits flow largely to wealthy countries.

While this pattern isn't unique to AI, it is fundamental to our global economic structure. The focus on individual consumer choices (like whether or not one should use AI, for art or otherwise,) distracts from the much larger systemic issues of imperialism, extractive capitalism, and global inequality that drive environmental degradation at a massive scale.

They are not going to stop building the data centers, and they weren't going to even if AI never got invented.

Creative Tools and Environmental Impact

In actuality, all creative practices have some sort of environmental impact in an industrialized society:

Digital art software (such as Photoshop, Blender, etc) generally uses 60-300 watts per hour depending on your computer's specifications. This is typically more energy than dozens, if not hundreds, of AI image generations (maybe even thousands if you are using a particularly low-quality one).

Traditional art supplies rely on similar if not worse scales of resource extraction, chemical processing, and global supply chains, all of which come with their own environmental impact.

Paint production requires roughly thirteen gallons of water to manufacture one gallon of paint.

Many oil paints contain toxic heavy metals and solvents, which have the potential to contaminate ground water.

Synthetic brushes are made from petroleum-based plastics that take centuries to decompose.

That being said, the point of this section isn't to deflect criticism of AI by criticizing other art forms. Rather, it's important to recognize that we live in a society where virtually all artistic avenues have environmental costs. Focusing exclusively on the newest technologies while ignoring the environmental costs of pre-existing tools and practices doesn't help to solve any of the issues with our current or future waste.

The largest environmental problems come not from individual creative choices, but rather from industrial-scale systems, such as:

Industrial manufacturing (responsible for roughly 22% of global emissions)

Industrial agriculture (responsible for roughly 24% of global emissions)

Transportation and logistics networks (responsible for roughly 14% of global emissions)

Making changes on an individual scale, while meaningful on a personal level, can't address systemic issues without broader policy changes and overall restructuring of global economic systems.

Intellectual Property Considerations

AWAY doesn't encourage members to contact government representatives about "IP theft" for multiple reasons:

We acknowledge that copyright law overwhelmingly serves corporate interests rather than individual creators

Creating new "learning rights" or "style rights" would further empower large corporations while harming individual artists and fan creators

Many AWAY members live outside the United States, many of which having been directly damaged by the US, and thus understand that intellectual property regimes are often tools of imperial control that benefit wealthy nations

Instead, we emphasize respect for artists who are protective of their work and style. Our guidelines explicitly prohibit imitating the style of artists who have voiced their distaste for AI, working on an opt-in model that encourages traditional artists to give and subsequently revoke permissions if they see fit. This approach is about respect, not legal enforcement. We are not a pro-copyright group.

In Conclusion

AWAY aims to cultivate thoughtful, ethical engagement with new technologies, while also holding respect for creative communities outside of itself. As a collective, we recognize that real environmental solutions require addressing concepts such as imperial exploitation, extractive capitalism, and corporate power—not just focusing on individual consumer choices, which do little to change the current state of the world we live in.

When discussing environmental impacts, it's important to keep perspective on a relative scale, and to avoid ignoring major issues in favor of smaller ones. We promote balanced discussions based in concrete fact, with the belief that they can lead to meaningful solutions, rather than misplaced outrage that ultimately serves to maintain the status quo.

If this resonates with you, please feel free to join our discord. :)

Works Cited:

USGS Water Use Data: https://www.usgs.gov/mission-areas/water-resources/science/water-use-united-states

Golf Course Superintendents Association of America water usage report: https://www.gcsaa.org/resources/research/golf-course-environmental-profile

Equinix data center water sustainability report: https://www.equinix.com/resources/infopapers/corporate-sustainability-report

Environmental Working Group's Meat Eater's Guide (beef energy calculations): https://www.ewg.org/meateatersguide/

Hugging Face AI energy consumption study: https://huggingface.co/blog/carbon-footprint

International Energy Agency report on data centers: https://www.iea.org/reports/data-centres-and-data-transmission-networks

Goldman Sachs "Generational Growth" report on AI power demand: https://www.goldmansachs.com/intelligence/pages/gs-research/generational-growth-ai-data-centers-and-the-coming-us-power-surge/report.pdf

Artists Network's guide to eco-friendly art practices: https://www.artistsnetwork.com/art-business/how-to-be-an-eco-friendly-artist/

The Earth Chronicles' analysis of art materials: https://earthchronicles.org/artists-ironically-paint-nature-with-harmful-materials/

Natural Earth Paint's environmental impact report: https://naturalearthpaint.com/pages/environmental-impact

Our World in Data's global emissions by sector: https://ourworldindata.org/emissions-by-sector

"The High Cost of High Tech" report on electronics manufacturing: https://goodelectronics.org/the-high-cost-of-high-tech/

"Unearthing the Dirty Secrets of the Clean Energy Transition" (on rare earth mineral mining): https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/apr/18/clean-energy-dirty-mining-indigenous-communities-climate-crisis

Electronic Frontier Foundation's position paper on AI and copyright: https://www.eff.org/wp/ai-and-copyright

Creative Commons research on enabling better sharing: https://creativecommons.org/2023/04/24/ai-and-creativity/

[chipjrwibignaturals]

but also at the same time the existence of those people is great for any personal ai moral scruples my shit brain may try and pull. like buddy i am literally just sitting here i didnt do SHIT

honestly ppl who legitimately choose to use chatgpt are a mystery to me like the closest i ever get to that beast willingly is being a dougdoug viewer

[srbachchan]

DAY 6273

Jalsa, Mumbai Apr 19, 2025/Apr 20 Sat/Sun 1:12 am

words of wisdom from Shweta , sent to me 👆🏼 .. her repertoire of books and reading is immense .. as is of Navya .. it is such a delight to sit in their presence and company and be educated about aspects of life and the world .. it is astonishing ..

And that is what eats us elders up .. there is the desire to do and be a part of what this GEn thinks and does .. but the limitations of time barricade the impulse and the intent ..

Life did not move so rapidly in our time or in the time of our elders .. now the rapidity is so volatile that the wishes to accomplish all is overwhelming .. you do not want to miss out a single day, in case you miss something that you had wished you would want to do, or be a part of ..

The excitement of what the World does to day and the speed with which it does it is unbelievably attractive .. and one wants so desperately to be a art of it .. or many parts of it .. but time is not with us .. at our age we lament the time .. and we feel let down .. for the wish to be having the time to be involved , to test, to apply, to discover, to invent, to admire and enjoy that spectacle .. is huge ..

But the hugeness hits a wall .. the timeless wall of limitations ..

"एक घड़ी ख़रीद कर, हाथ में क्या बांध ली;

वक़्त पीछे ही पड़ गया मेरे ~ "

पूज्य बाबूजी के शब्द

My wishes as ever .. and the great battle of invention that percolates our lives persists to be in its excel ..

The excel of AI ..

So, I asked and it replied :

"Artificial Intelligence (AI) is the simulation of human intelligence in machines designed to think, learn, and make decisions. It powers technologies like voice assistants, recommendation systems, and autonomous vehicles. AI works through algorithms that process data, recognize patterns, and improve over time through machine learning. It is transforming industries by automating tasks, enhancing productivity, and enabling innovative solutions. From healthcare diagnostics to personalized education, AI’s potential is vast. However, it also raises ethical concerns about bias, privacy, and job displacement. As AI continues to evolve, balancing innovation with responsibility will be key to ensuring it benefits society as a whole."

The clarity of social implications is a massive debate , engaging thinkers and artists and writers and indeed all creative talent ..

For the creative content of a writer are his words .. and if the AI data bank consumes that , as a part of a legacy to be maintained over time infinity, it can be used by ChatGPT to refer or use that extract for its personalised usage .. making it the property of ChatGPT ... NOT the property of the writers or the artists, from where it originally came ..

So the copyright of the artist has been technically 'stolen' , and he or she never gets the benefit of ts copyright, when GPT uses it for its presence .. !!!!

The true value of an artists creation will never be restored to his credit, because technology usurps it .. gulps it down deliciously , with an aerated drink and finalising its consumption with a belch 😜🤭 ... END OF CHAPTER !!!

End of discussion .. !!!

In time there shall be much to be heard and written on the subject ..

Each invention provides benefits .. but also victims ..

बनाये कोई - लाभ उठाए कोई और, जिसने उसे बनाया ही न हो

Love

Amitabh Bachchan

[lady-raziel]

the cabinet picks don't even surprise me anymore. tomorrow when trump announces Hannibal lecter for secretary of agriculture i'll be like no that makes sense. put thanos in charge of resource management. let the artifact-stealing nazis from Indiana jones run the smithsonian. create a joint commission on the ethical usage of AI run by skynet and Hal 9000. who gives a shit anymore. we're gonna have to fight the legion of doom already what's it matter

[vergess]

Anonymous asked @arionwind:

(this is an ask for vergess; since their inbox is closed right now they said to direct asks to you instead) people on reddit are so stupid about AI…apparently some of the backgrounds in the new touhou game turned out to be AI-generated and everyone is flipping their shit to reiterate: it’s not any of the art. not any of the music. it’s some fucking BACKGROUNDS. how is using a couple of AI images grabbed off the internet different from using stock images (which zun has done for past games!)

On the one hand, I'm inclined to say it would be good to, if you're using AI generated assets with no human editing (eg a background image), to credit that in your credits like, "additional backgrounds generated with this model" or whatever, so people can know where to find more Like That if they want to. So, IDK, did the Touhou team do anything like that? (Editor's note: Yes, they did)

Because, of course, unaltered AI generations are public domain in my jurisdiction and thus you don't need to pay to use them and you aren't obligated to credit them as long as you aren't doing a Fraud with them (eg, as long as you aren't saying you were the sole creator of an original work), but it's still polite to let your audience know where to go for more.

That would be my only real criticism though, and I'm. I don't. I don't have the wherewithal to deal with Touhou itself or the Touhou fandom on a good day, let alone if they're having a witch hunt. So I have no way of knowing if such a credit exists.

In terms of "how does it differ from using a stock image" I will say, it differs because a stock image is not public domain and thus must be licensed, eg used with explicit permission from the author or used under a contract. You can infringe the copyright of a stock image; you can't do that to an AI image. So, to some extent, the difference is that all AI image usage is permissible, but some stock image usage is not permissible.

And, of course, there's also the fact that most stock images used more resources (electricity, time, etc) to create than most AI images.

Like, the differences that exist are either neutral or mildly in favour of the AI.

But anyway, it's fascinating that something clearly made by human artist(s) that uses a handful of public domain assets is being denigrated for Killing Real Art And Destroying Artists' Lives.

It's always really interesting (read: miserable) when artists are being obliterated in the name of protecting artists. Happens all the time, but this latest iteration is still Very Fucking Annoying.

ETA: The good folks at @are-we-art-yet have been discussing this too, fortunately, so I am now aware that the creative team (it's a team!) was very up front about what assets were made with AI and which model was used.

It was a model with a paid license fee which itself was trained on paid licensed images, managed by the adobe photoshop company. So whatever arguments one might be tempted to make about "theft" don't apply, as the training data was all legally licensed.

Now, the law is not a replacement for ethics or morality, but if you're seeing people say the Touhou backgrounds were "stolen" no the fuck they weren't.

[venndaai]

it's less of a serious issue than the ableism obviously, but I've also been seeing anti-AI rants drifting more and more into the realm aesthetic complaint dressed up as moral complaint. If someone uses generative AI to prep for their home DnD campaign the issue is whether the ethical and environment cost of that usage is greater or lesser than the regular cost of using a computer and the internet, not that this person is Betraying Art, Humanity and their own Soul or what ever

[duckprintspress]

Just used this template from the Author's Guild to send this letter (I edited/expanded on the template.)

I am writing to you as an indie publisher. I have discovered three of our books, including the work almost 30 creators, in the data you used to train your generative AI model. This usage was not authorized and violates both the Press's copyright and the authors' and artists' whose work was included. The books in question are Hockey Bois by A. L. Heard, And Seek (Not) to Alter Me: Queer Fanworks Inspired by Shakespeare's "Much Ado About Nothing," and Many Drops Make a Stream by A. L. Heard. This letter is to put you on notice that you do not have the right to use my work to train your AI models. You must obtain express permission and provide reasonable licensing terms for authors’ works. I hope you will set an example of responsible, legal, ethical AI use by obtaining permission before using authors’ and journalists’ works going forward and compensating us for the use you have already made. I'd say thank you for your time, but honestly I hate that I have to worry about this, hate that I have to take my own time to write this, and hate that generative AI-loving technocrats are actively destroying the arts in supposed pursuit of creating the arts. So I don't really thank you for anything. Please stop it, and if you refuse to, at least you can pay us with the billions of dollars you've earned by preying on the rest of the world. Claire Houck Owner, Duck Prints Press

The Author's Guild wrote up a list of actionable steps that authors whose work has been stolen can take, so I'll be looking at that more to see what, if anything, else I can do. Several require membership in the Guild, tho, and that's not happening right now. This is US-oriented info.