Ask Lemmy

AI (LLMs) is/are a fantastic tool.

But that's what it is, a tool that can make some tasks easier.

It's not world-changing like some tech bros and CEOs think it is because they don't actually understand the technology.

It's also not the apocalypse or The Matrix or Skynet coming to end civilization. It's just a tool.

After the AI bubble bursts, AI will still be there, as a tool for humans to use.

I think it's possible that some of the people you see on Lemmy may have started using AI a little more in their lives and see it for what it is.

I'll use AI to summarize a long document. That's about it.

Can't tell if its the propaganda machine invading, or annoying teenage tech-bros who are detached from reality.

They're both "annoying teenage tech-bros who are detached from reality" and they are spreading propaganda they picked up elsewhere.

I think AI has positives to help people, that being said I think it's out of control currently. I hope the bubble burst soon and we can actually get to a reasonable balance.

Humans are social animals, in the United States especially where people are severely separated- they’ll look for and find any kind of easy access towards social interactions: including but not limited to Chat bots. It’s a sad reality that they would dismiss the negative affects it has on our social brains, dismiss the environmental effects it has on our planet, dismiss the social warmings because they’re too involved with LLMS “AI”.

That’s right, it’s not even AI; it’s only large language models or some agentic systems. Way smaller ones existed in the past, think Dr. Sbaitso (1992) or A.L.I.C.E. (1995.) it’s actually not hard to make a chat bot, just have it echo what the user says with some key phrases. That’s the whole existence of chat bots and today’s current “ai” only they have a LOT more variables that were generated off of huge randomly generated data sets (both off of free open sources and stolen data) and that’s what causes it to hallucinate: it’s the randomness that humans don’t have the ability to change or update simply because it’s such a huge list of variables. It’s so massive people think it’s real intelligence! PEOPLE WERE FOOLED ON 1990’s CHART BOTS TOO! 😭 😂

Anywho we recommend the movies Desk Set, Space Odyssey, pi and even Alphaville. They’re related to the subject and they’re pretty good at pointing out the bruhs.

I suppose it's due many people not seeing things as black or white, but as a variety of grays.

So there is a few groups there is the ignorant group, which you are part of evident by your terminology use. When ignorant people do things they tend to be wrong whether that is trusting AI or not trusting AI.

If people weren't fucking stupid, these scams would eventually stop working.

What's it been, 4 years since NFTs? And AI morons are already falling for this shit.

Honestly, the problem when talking about "AI" is how many different things that can mean.

• General AI chats
• Coding agents
• Automated pentesting/vulnerability discovery
• Image/video/music generation
• Grammar checking
• Automated support agents (phone or chat)
• Autonomous weaponry

and so many more. Being Pro-AI could mean you like one or two application of the AI, but be against it in the others. I know very few people that like it for the use of media generation. However, there have been a lot of long time vulnerabilities in very popular open source projects that was only just discovered. That seems like a pretty undeniable use case demonstrating its usefulness.

Then of course there's governments that want to get their greedy blood thirsty hands on it to create autonomous weaponry. So now if you try to defend AI for a use case like defensively finding program vulnerabilities you somehow also have to defend AI weaponry?

For a generic AI model, it is very powerful and can either be used to grow yourself or abused so your brain doesn't have to work at all. You can use AI to do the hard work for you, or use it as a personal tutor to guide you into what to learn. People will of course mention hallucinations as why it can't be used to learn, but you don't have to take AI at its words. If you were to ask it to create a lesson plan on what you should study for a subject, in what order, and resources are available, you can do all of the actual learning using content the AI has no control over. So what you do with that is going to be up to the person, and opinions on it are going to vary wildly.

Some people argue any use case is not okay given the various concerns of energy and water usage, and where those models sourced their training data. Not to mention if you support AI you must be supporting the AI companies. I agree there are concerns for the environmental impact, and the training data discussion is a long one on its own. However, I do think you can support AI as a technology, and not be okay with the way the technology is being done in regards to environmental impact. And given AI can be done on a local machine, I don't think it has to be tied at all with the big tech at all.

"AI" is such a wide and immense topic. And what we talk about with AI today will not be relevant come next year with how quickly it is developing. We shall see if some form of Moore's law applied with the growth of AI as far as efficiency and quality of the AI goes.

This is nothing new actually, the same thing happend during the crypto boom.

There's slop users (autoclankers) and then there's researchers or developers actually doing the same stuff they've been doing for 5+ years.

I think it just seems that way because there's always a clash on practically every post.

Some people don't see the inherent flaw in outsourcing their physical thoughts to a cloud model, or the massive economic bubble they are helping to create.

But some people are doing some genuinely interesting things that would have otherwise been impossible several years ago just because AI and model training research got a huge boost for everyone the past few years.

My personal favorite is a drone that rapidly identifies and counts produce plant quality, output, issues, etc for large farms with some brand spanking new image models, and it costs about as much as maybe a new toolbox. No one wants to manually weed through hundreds of acres to count buds and try to catch problems before its too late. It's a great upgrade from doing random samples that misses a lot of data.

On the other hand, those opposed to AI also have a subgroup that wants anything and everything with AI in the name dead, without any regard to what it is or what it does.

It's like when you throw world and ml users into one post. They both think the other is louder, and also the big dumb lol.

I hardly ever see them. I love being able to just set my home feed to subscribed communities.