this post was submitted on 22 Jul 2025
45 points (95.9% liked)
Technology
296 readers
195 users here now
Share interesting Technology news and links.
Rules:
- No paywalled sites at all.
- News articles has to be recent, not older than 2 weeks (14 days).
- No videos.
- Post only direct links.
To encourage more original sources and keep this space commercial free as much as I could, the following websites are Blacklisted:
- Al Jazeera.
- NBC.
- CNBC.
- Substack.
- Tom's Hardware.
- ZDNet.
- TechSpot.
- Ars Technica.
- Vox Media outlets, with exception for Axios(Due to being ad free.)
- Engadget.
- TechCrunch.
- Gizmodo.
- Futurism.
- PCWorld.
- ComputerWorld.
- Mashable.
- Hackaday.
- WCCFTECH.
More sites will be added to the blacklist as needed.
Encouraged:
- Archive links in the body of the post.
- Linking to the direct source, instead of linking to an article talking about the source.
founded 2 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
As a software dev who is interested in AI, I've spent a lot of time building a personal AI chat app, and I feel like that gives me a view on things.
I can totally see how people become enamoured by this stuff, because on the surface level it can be very convincing, and very compelling. It feels like a person. But in my position - where I'm writing the code and can see every interaction happening under the hood at the base level - it becomes very clear it's nothing more than a rather competent predictive text. Just a probability engine filling in the blanks. And I'm glad for that, because as much as I might interact with AI, I'm never going to start believing it is sentient, or that it cares about me in any way.
AI is a glorified autocomplete, and nothing more. Please don't believe otherwise.
It's still Eliza.
It’s really not. And it will continue to diverge.
One finds the limits of Eliza really fast.
Okay so it’s a more complicated Eliza with way, way more pre-programmed statements.
Yup, infinite, I’d say.
well, 8 to 64 billion
Oh? So that’s the max number of combinations of all supported Unicode characters?
Practically infinite is a lame reframing. I’ll admit. But that’s what I want to clarify I mean. And “nearly infinite” makes no sense. Sure.
I'm in a very similar position (though I'm using koboldcpp) and I feel like it's easy to see how shallow it is after just a few cursory interactions. It honestly makes me pretty concerned about some people's social understanding if they're getting enthralled by the predictive text machine.