Compassion ~ Thought
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
The word itself keeps changing its meaning - it used to mean ML techniques, then looking forward to gen-AI, now it supposedly means "capitalism distilled"? See e.g. https://www.structural-integrity.eu/is-there-a-need-for-ai-after-capitalism/ for an excellent example of the kind of anxiety surrounding AI that we are talking about.
I agree with you that ML itself is not a problem, nor even is LLM technology. Although like nuclear power, as we advance towards true AI the more powerful the tool the greater danger its misuse portends, as you said. And also as you said, as it got big the discussion moved towards the latter topic, without bothering to be precise in what was being discussed, instead calling everything by the (clickbait?) buzzword "AI".
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
Although it should only matter if you chose to subscribe to that community where the mod is in charge.
One thing that your comments touch on here is just how little of the "Anxiety around AI" actually has to do with AI.
When e.g. Oracle lays off 30k workers, how little of that truly has to do with AI? vs. instead market instability etc. What complicates the issue is that most often, the corporation will claim that the layoffs are to better streamline the company in a future where AI will need fewer workers, so to prepare for that now... they'll just go ahead and get rid of them immediately.
So this isn't even people using AI inappropriately, this is people blaming AI for what they wanted to do anyway, for reasons if profit.
Then again, events such as those presage what is to come: when AI truly can do it all, how will humans be able to earn a paycheck? Spoiler alert: not all of us will. And especially in the meantime there will be period of transition and upheaval.
This is what I felt your comments lacked acknowledgement of: not the downside to using the tools but the wider conversation that uses the keyword "AI" but has really barely anything to do with it, as opposed to political and social and economic forces.
(I did not downvote you btw)
Okay but Grok is still surely part of the "Anxiety around AI is growing rapidly in the US, research shows" phenomena, as Grok is one of the various AIs that people are aware of, and anxious about.
Your words read to me like you have kept yourself aware of the positive benefits of using AI - which many people on Lemmy including to some degree myself - have done far less of.
But there are some negatives as well...
Actually, originally I think it was tongue-in-cheek, as Netflix originally intentionally focused on the long-tail part of the distribution. Also the wording was journalists writing articles iirc, even if emulating edgelords (or possibly spreading it after having read on the likes of 4chan:-P).
And then as its selection went down - tbf that had little to do with Netflix and more with other companies trying to copy its success, like Disney Plus for their content, and Paramount Plus for theirs, and so on - it started more and more to ring true. Especially as it started showing "ads", like at the end of a series it would start auto-playing some previews of some other show. They always walked each such decision back, but at first when they released each one there was no way to turn it off, and then after a month or so it would become possible to log into a computer browser (on a totally separate device) and change the default setting, which would affect your TV also.
I've had Netflix since before it offered streaming, and I am always perpetually pissed off at it and thinking of cancelling after each decision to push forward the enshittification. Again, some of which is not its fault.
Netflix is just an enormously controversial company. Usually I get people pissed off at me for saying that I even so much as use it, while you seem to be offering the opposite thought. Regardless, it's a company that people tend to have strong feelings about:-P.
B-b-be-be-because shut up you, that's why!
Won't someone think of the poor shareholders?
(/s)
Your "if" there is doing an awfully lot of the heavy lifting. Fwiw, I'm not talking special-purpose, custom-built LLMs - a large part of the problem is the lack of precision language uses to describe the concepts under discussion.
An example: https://lemmy.world/post/46390157
Another example: https://discuss.tchncs.de/post/59584533
Both of these would be better called "cheating" than "AI", but seeing as how AI both makes it easier and more to the point so many companies (such as Oracle) are literally pushing their programmers (those remaining anyway) to exclusively write programs using AI rather than by themselves, the very definition of "cheating" will need to be reexamined as a result.
In the examples also take note of how poor quality the LLM output is - e.g. regardless of whether the source is Grok or Claude or whatever, those therapy examples are not helpful in the slightest. Your counterargument might be that these are the "cheap" (aka free) AIs, but preemptively I will say in response: they still count as "AI", especially in the context of the OP.
She's just mad that she did not think of the idea first! (/s for people who cannot recognize a joke - this means you Grok!)
Especially the women! 😋
Bc when I use a calculator, I actually DO expect literal perfection. And when I use google search, I expect it to be "useful". And when I find information in Wikipedia, I expect it to be somewhat authoritative, even if incomplete. And if I use automative driving features, I expect them not to completely take over the wheel and crash me into a brick wall... or to a little child in a crosswalk right in front of me.
People who drive drunk lose their privileges to drive anymore. Employees who screw up that often get fired. Doctors who dispense incorrect medical advice lose their ability to practice medicine, plus get exposed to lawsuits. Counselors who tell their patients to kill themselves... Anyway, people DO experience the consequences of their actions, like ALL THE FUCKING TIME.
Whereas in contrast, AI is said that it is "going to be" great, not that it is great now. Fine, finish it and then we'll talk. In the meantime, stop shoving it in front of my face.
If AI is like a human, it's at best 2-year-old and at worst more like 6 months. It should not be "in charge", e.g. of dispensing medical advice. But since it takes so much time to check its results for errors, it is literally slower and more painful to use it than to not use it (sometimes, often in fact).
You have a point somewhere buried in your mind, as revealed by the insightful first sentence, but your phrasing in the second sentence reads like sea-lioning and is not helping. Nobody is asking for "behind perfection" as that is literally mathematically impossible, and that is not what "moving the goalposts" means. It should not be enough to sound intelligent - we need to actually be such (same for AI as well).
Narrator: actually, no it was not.
e.g. it still spreads misinformation.
You would do well to remember that the enemy of my enemy is not always my friend.
If a normal person were to call me a troll many times in a row, I would strongly consider blocking them. But I wonder if blocking these people would have any effect upon this spam?
I also find it the height of irony that we are all told by dbzer0 admins that we should strive hard to understand, since those mods must surely have their reasons for doing what they did, whereas if e.g. Lemmy.World were to block calls for outright murder of themselves personally, then all of a sudden moderation should no longer be allowed to moderate that violent rhetoric spammed at them. One rule for thee while another, different rule for me...
Also, I am somewhat anti-AI, but not to the extent of trolling anyone. Though do facts matter anymore - i.e. have these two mods been kicked off of dbzer0 for their false accusations, sent preemptively out to half the Threadiverse?
When lemm.ee shut down, all the "free speech" incels (to whom no means create a new account and keep going) had to go somewhere. Never mind that it was the weight of all that toxicity that caused lemm.ee to shut down... just create a new account and keep going. And hexbear was defederated from so many other instances, it just makes sense to create an account on an instance that is friendly to HB but that also can reach the rest of the Threadiverse - they want to have their cake and eat it too (which makes sense, I would too in their place, and in fact I strongly considered making an account on dbzer0 myself in the past, thinking that it had defederated from HB but that turned out to have been merely a technical glitch, I think due to HB having lost its domain name at one point).
I made this image a few days ago but it seems to still fit here as well:)
Thank you for correcting me here, I apologize for spreading misinformation.
@rimu@piefed.social there seems to be a bug in PieFed.social's modlog? I see four entries that all say done by "lemmy.dbzer0.com admin" a week ago citing "Banned account OpenStars", but @db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com confirms this is not the case. No "reason" statement is given that I can see, and no community name either (which is why I interpreted that to mean a site ban). I just upvoted a post in YPTB that seemed to work (the color of the vote changed) which points to the likelihood that I am not instance banned from either direction.
Obviously, but unless the modlog is being spammed with many entries, and I receive notifications for each one individually (which is actually happening right now from communities on dbzer0, and unlike Lemmy, PieFed actually sends notifications for such events, but I will set that sub-topic aside for s moment), then in theory I do not care if I am (preemptively?) banned from let's say c/conservative@newreddit.com or c/extremetankiedeathsquad@thereallemmy.fuckallwesterners (to be clear, these are hypothetical made-up names!🤪), if I never wanted to post or vote on their content anyway? They are even doing me a favor if it prevents it from showing in my feed (which it would on Lemmy iirc, but on PieFed it would not).