this post was submitted on 05 Apr 2026
558 points (99.5% liked)

Fuck AI

6677 readers
1678 users here now

"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"

A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.

AI, in this case, refers to LLMs, GPT technology, and anything listed as "AI" meant to increase market valuations.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] melfie@lemmy.zip 22 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

How is an AI agent any different than any other software just because it does inference with a LLM? If I order something from their website and I get overcharged due to a bug, are they also not responsible? It’s not like agents can’t be tested or like guardrails can’t be put into place.

I know as a software engineer, I’m responsible for the code in any PR that has my name on it, regardless of what tools I may have used to generate the code, including AI. Are their dev teams not responsible for making sure their shit works?

[–] Bluescluestoothpaste@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Because most other software the dev understands what he build, or can debug if something is off. LLM are just black boxes the devs have no clue why sometimes the answers are very incorrect.

[–] melfie@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Sure, but AI engineers are well aware of that fact (or should be) and there are ways to limit the potential damage, like human in the middle, especially for purchases over a certain threshold. Overall, a system like this like this should never really be trusted to make purchases without the customer approving each purchase.

Then again, if you’re going to approve every purchase, I’m not sure how it really saves time. If it is purchasing without approval, the first time it buys something you didn’t want and you have to battle Target to get it refunded will negate any time savings. Largely seems like AI for the sake of AI.

[–] Archer@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

Not if they make all their customer support AI as well and make it impossible to talk to a human!

[–] Sunflier@lemmy.world 54 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

Nope! That violates the deeply rooted basis of law for the sale of goods. Such sales are subject to individual states' laws, but most follow Article 2 of the Uniform Commercial Code. There is inherently no meeting of the minds (the very foundation on all contract law dating back before America was even discovered by Europeans) if AI is engaging in anything commercial in nature, much more so if they're mistakes.

You cannot pull a bait and switch on non-conforming/mistaken goods without letting the other party choose to accept or reject the goods. This is more so if that choice is made before the mistake is discovered and the price changed. Here, the supplier has engaged in the risk of loss by utilizing an untested replacement for workers.

Also, how is the recieving party supposed to know they're not tendering an alternative replacement of non-conforming goods?

[–] Bakkoda@lemmy.world 22 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Laws you say? I guess we'll see you in court. Unless you can't afford that. Then you can get fucked.

[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 9 points 2 days ago

Yep. Class action lawsuit. Get fucked out of hundreds or thousands of dollars; receive $12 and a coupon book in compensation.

[–] Wilco@lemmy.zip 11 points 2 days ago

They are likely bribing ... erm ... I mean "lobbying" politicians right now to get a legal loophole around this.

[–] matlag@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 days ago

There were laws about IPs and copyright, the kind that would prevent any corp from parsing basically the whole internet and use it without any restriction or consideration for the content creators. Do you remember what happened to those?

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 14 points 2 days ago

We are not responsible for our own systems - idiots

[–] Red_October@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

AI agent fucks up and makes you pay more, or leads you to buy things that straight up don't exist? You'll pay for it.

AI agent fucks up and sells you your whole order for $0.01? Sorry the AI isn't really supposed to so you can either cancel your order or pay the full "correct" retail price.

[–] U7826391786239@piefed.zip 170 points 3 days ago (2 children)

am i old? i simply can't imagine handing control of my money over to AI because i can't be assed to order shit online all by myself--which takes less time than writing a prompt

[–] treadful@lemmy.zip 59 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Can't imagine handing control of anything over to an LLM.

[–] Bazell@lemmy.zip 13 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (12 children)

Nah, you are wrong. Since LLMs are for entertainment, making it control an NPC is totally fine, since hallucinations will only make this NPC funnier.

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] Whimsical418@aussie.zone 28 points 3 days ago (1 children)

The cynic in me says they'll start making the normal online ordering process much harder and worse to try to force ai shopping usage

[–] pdxfed@lemmy.world 21 points 3 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Retailers will eliminate search, product sort and filters, etc.

They will dumb it down to happy value meal, the generous ones may allow ala carte ordering, a nod to legacy web purchasing. Imagine allowing consumers to choose their own products?!? How dated and unprofitable.

With most people nearly illiterate, as designed, they won't complain.

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 9 points 2 days ago

it will likely "hallucinates suggestions", thats not even the same category of the item you want.

[–] GreenBeanMachine@lemmy.world 14 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

I see corporations have found a new use case for AI - bypassing the laws and avoiding any responsibility.

"AI did it, there's nothing we can do, because it's not our fault".

"You died, whoopsie."

[–] mrgoosmoos@lemmy.ca 10 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

Guess I'm just stupid, because I still don't understand what the AI agent is doing. I've read the article and the comments in this thread

is this something where you can have a conversation with a chat bot, and tell it to go buy you something? like you can chat and say oh I'm looking for this particular thing, and then it will tell you what that is and can purchase it for you? and so it might tell you one thing and order another, or just completely make something up and order some random shit. because if that is the case then yeah that's absolute crap, that's their customer service agent and they are responsible for its behaviour

kind of weird that the article doesn't make this clear.

[–] matlag@sh.itjust.works 11 points 2 days ago

Based on the terms and conditions, my expectation is it will randomly order a bunch of expensive items you didn't want on your behalf whenever a quarter in on track to miss the target numbers.

[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I can't find the bot on the site, looks like it's on the app.

They applied AI to the search requests. If you search for "Find me soemthing for fahters day." It will figure out you meant Fathers Day and say "suggestions for fathers day"

While an LLM on such a short leash will probably do fine with a fixed catalog, there's still an outside chance it will go absolutely nuts and suggest weird, possibly inappropriate things. I really don't know how weird or inappropriate targets catalog can be but I'm sure you could find something. They're just trying to head people off at the pass by saying, "If you order it, you have to pay for it, even if we recommended something weird to you."

It looks like they've got some decent guardrails in. I tried to trick it out and ask it for a potato salad recipe. It gives me back old-school results instead of an AI smart response.

[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

This appears to be an upcoming "people bought similar" bot that will automatically add items to your cart based on trends.

It will be up to the user to remove them at check out.

@mrgoosmoos@lemmy.ca

[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 days ago

ohh fuck, yeah you add shit to my card and require me to remove it, everyone will just stop buying there online, even those not boycotting now.

[–] _chris@lemmy.world 118 points 3 days ago (2 children)

If you’re dumb enough to trust the AI agent at all, but especially one that is provided, owned, and operated by the capitalist company that you’re shopping at and you expect it to act in your best interest, that’s a special kind of stupid.

[–] limonfiesta@lemmy.world 48 points 3 days ago (10 children)

Yes, if you, or any other relatively young or middle aged Lemmy user got got by trusting Target's AI shopper, I'd laugh.

But that's not a representative sample. This will be used to exploit the poor, uneducated, and elderly.

I think our best bet is that someone creates a script that burns through Target's tokens and that drives the costs up to unsustainable levels.

Maybe that's a pipe dream, I just know that our lawmakers will do nothing to help, so that's what we're left with.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 28 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Be that as it may, I wish there were a law on the books holding the AI agent and its operators accountable. Sounds like a massive fucking retail scam to me, and we don't blame the victim when it's a human con artist stealing their money, so it makes no sense to me to blame the victim when it happens digitally.

[–] Akuchimoya@startrek.website 19 points 3 days ago (2 children)

In Canada, a court ruled that Air Canada was liable for its AI chatbot. Air Canada's lawyer(s) attempted to argue that the chat bot was a separate entity responsible for itself, an astonished judge said, "lol no" (not an exact quote). https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/air-canada-chatbot-lawsuit-1.7116416

But that's Canada, and Target is not here (anymore), so...
Not relevant to the company at hand, but there is some precedence somewhere.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] parson0@startrek.website 18 points 2 days ago

Entertainment purposes only

[–] bitwolf@sh.itjust.works 31 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Thus reads like a need for regulation.

Thanks Trump for preventing such regulation.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Taleya@aussie.zone 17 points 2 days ago

In sane countries this results in charges being laid

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 38 points 3 days ago

I guess that also means if I successfully gaslight the AI into giving me a 120% discount, Target has to pay for it.

[–] JigglySackles@lemmy.world 41 points 3 days ago

Oh look, even more reasons to avoid target AND AI.

[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 26 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Who the fuck is so stupid and lets an AI do the shopping?

[–] ledasll@lemmy.wtf 19 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Have you seen who is USA president?

[–] Railcar8095@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago

What has Benjamin Netanyahu to do with AI?

[–] jtrek@startrek.website 15 points 3 days ago (8 children)

I have met many people who are at least that stupid. Gullible people with limited ability to imagine future consequences.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] bandwidthcrisis@lemmy.world 18 points 2 days ago

promptly notifying the Agentic Commerce Agent and Target of any activity

Which will involve trying to persuade another ai agent that it isn't use error and that you really need to speak to someone.

[–] jqubed@lemmy.world 46 points 3 days ago (3 children)

Why would I need AI to shop at Target for me in the first place?

[–] Agrivar@lemmy.world 33 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Why would I need ~~AI~~ to shop at Target ~~for me~~ in the first place?

FTFY

Fuck Target.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 29 points 3 days ago

Target and Walmart also say that if you don't scan something when you go through self checkout, you can be charged with shoplifting.

In other words, the companies have none of the responsibility and people have all of the liability.

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 1 points 1 day ago

they have been upcharging thier instore products as it is, year by year. plus eliminating thier own in-store brand for "deal worthy"

[–] kinfuyuki@lemmy.zip 36 points 3 days ago (1 children)

i hope they start to sell $1000 pictures of products.. like.. it says in the top of the description its a picture, people read that but AI might skip that entirely, it will demotivate scalpers. i remember this being a serious problem for scapers in ebay, maybe we should start doing these practices in more places.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] PattyMcB@lemmy.world 31 points 3 days ago

Fuck Target, too. Such a garbage company.

load more comments
view more: next ›