It is very useful, just only in very few circumstances. 99% of what people are shoving it into, it has no place being there, but there are some things that it legitimately just does better.
I used it to select flowers to decorate my room with. In this case, it worked out excellent. The selection was done within hours, and I created a map of my room for arranging–all on a day off work.
AI is very useful and powerful as a propaganda device and a system to generate and disseminate disinformation, misinformation and non-information very quickly and very efficiently.
It was thought that the internet would do the same but that system only goes at the speed of humans and the whole system is regulated by humans … so as propaganda tool, it has worked better but not as well as predicted. Humans saw the the potential for abuse and fought back against it.
AI is like propaganda on cocaine … and there is very little to stop it other than our awareness of it … but the majority of everyone in the world don’t care to understand what they are watching is real or not. What that means is that AI is set to reshape how everyone thinks and how we all see the world.
wise_pancake@lemmy.ca
on 18 Jun 12:46
nextcollapse
We already saw Grok being used for this, though rather clumsily by stuffing the prompt.
If an AI company were behind the scenes fine tuning on specific political sentiment you would never know.
In fact there’s some evidence that later ChatGPT models are more right wing biased than early models (which were accused of being left wing).
Also important to note how much social media gets fed into these things and how astroturfed modern social media is these days, so even if not explicitly biased the well has been poisoned.
I’ve used it to learn how to read sheet music and help learn other skills I normally wouldn’t be able to.
ObviouslyNotBanana@lemmy.world
on 18 Jun 13:19
collapse
I’ve used it to figure out a button on a vintage calculator which had multiple humans give up assuming it’s broken. Neither I, nor the AI knew what it was for but I could use it as a very willing conversation partner that didn’t grow tired of trying new things.
I’ve had it help me come up with an effective deep fry batter that fit my exact needs and gave a perfect result.
It’s usefulness is limited in many respects but if you have a rough idea of what you’re talking about it will (mostly) be helpful. Until it forgets things.
Are you not self aware at all? Who do you think the article is about?
fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 18 Jun 13:09
collapse
That’s what they said about the internet in its infancy.
Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world
on 18 Jun 12:19
nextcollapse
It’s the same sentiment towards immigrants that’s seen on the right.
The media have been running the exact same headlines. It feels weirdly like the corporate run media have an agenda to show us all the horrors of AI like they will take our jobs, they are going to collapse our society, they are a threat to our children, they contribute to organized crime. Same headlines every time.
I anticipate people here will be bothered by this statement just like if you say immigration isn’t really a big problem in r/conservative. The media is insidious. But I really think it’s a good opportunity to see how it shapes public opinion.
iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works
on 18 Jun 12:54
nextcollapse
iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works
on 18 Jun 14:17
collapse
No, it really doesn’t. You can’t just say “I bet this opinion will be unpopular” and then when it does, in fact, turn out to be unpopular make the leap to say “this just proves how correct my opinion was”
No, it only proves how unpopular it was.
Even if all the same comparisons could be made between why people dislike genAI and why people dislike immigrants (they can’t, btw), one of those things involves flesh and blood human beings.
disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
on 18 Jun 12:59
collapse
That’s intentional. They sensationalize to desensitize. Unlike the introduction of computers or the internet, AI will absolutely take far more jobs than it will create. Goldman Sachs predicts a 50% reduction in US jobs by 2045, and Republicans added a provision into the budget reconciliation that prohibits any regulation on AI for a decade, to ensure that prosperity goes to the corporations.
rottingleaf@lemmy.world
on 18 Jun 13:05
nextcollapse
I’ve learned of one interesting pathway from ancap to socialism long ago, as you might have guessed, through Georgism, but more generally - every finite resource that can’t be produced, like territory and laws of nature, shouldn’t be owned and should be considered common property shared by communist means. What can be produced is private property without limitations.
Thus you can own guns, tanks, jets and air carriers, but you shouldn’t be able to fully own territory and patents, because that eventually leads to legally reinforced monopoly.
I think there’s a logical connection from that to what our future looks like and how it will have to be resolved. Unless we want a caste society.
disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
on 18 Jun 13:15
collapse
I would have no problem getting anyone at r/conservative to pull up similar data points and statistics to show immigrants are taking jobs, contributing to crime statistics or any other claim. It’s very eerily similar to the emerging opinion on the left when compared to opinions on the right towards immigrants.
Regardless of validity of opinion. What I’m noticing is the role the media has played on shaping opinion and fed it.
disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
on 18 Jun 13:14
nextcollapse
The media is very predictable for sure. They put on the rose-colored glasses for the pro argument, and sensationalize the worst fears for the con. Historically, the truth lands in the middle.
Unlike the topic of immigration, with the massive wealth inequality of today, anything benefiting corporations over the working class is far more likely to work out in their favor.
I would have no problem getting anyone at r/conservative to pull up similar data points and statistics to show immigrants are taking jobs, contributing to crime statistics or any other claim.
You’ll find conservatives rarely bother trying to do this because it’s simply statistically not true
Then you’re in a bubble. One of the most frustrating things about the right currently is they have a large network that is very good at sharing information. They have a much tighter grip of current events than anyone I’ve seen on the left. The left are miles behind on any current events. Whenever something is happening, I’ve been heading over to right wing spaces because as much as I hate it, they tend to know things much faster and in more detail then the left wing spaces.
Just look at Lemmy here. Most information is a post and then 100 comments of talking about how upset we all are and gob smacked. But there is no further insight.
When I go to right wing spaces, it is similar but i do get extra information like background details about who individuals were or what led to an event that isn’t in an article. It comes with tons of bullshit but I trust I know ways to verify information enough to spot the bullshit.
That’s because search engines have reached the stage of enshittification where they no longer need to be good. Instead, they want you to spend as much time there as possible.
LLMs are still being sold as “the better option” - including by the exact same search giants who intentionally ruined their own search results. And many of them are already prioritizing agreeableness over “truthfulness.” And we’re still in the LLM honeymoon phase, where companies are losing billions of dollars on a yearly basis and undercharging their users.
This is something I think the ‘you have to use LLMs or you’re falling behind’ crowd are missing. Of course these companies want you to become dependent on their product, and unable to complete basic tasks without it, because then when they slap you with monthly fees and ads and tokens you won’t have a choice but to pay.
Use them if they’re useful, but don’t out source your brain. You’ll need it when the enshittification begins.
technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 18 Jun 13:55
nextcollapse
No it doesn’t. Fuck this fake news from these genocidal scumbags.
Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
on 18 Jun 16:28
nextcollapse
Yeah, but internet was for the people for decades.
(And it didn’t really cost nature as much. Or stolen from the people so much - even by current laws LLM companies do that illegally.)
“AIs” are getting their enshitification & monopolies pre-baked into their core bossiness models from the start.
Not to mention that AIs will definitely worsen inequalities all over the world (like assembly robots that replaced people but aren’t owned by people, and people still need to work 8h/day for decades for some reason).
(This but AI. I’m not saying, there aren’t/won’t be other jobs, just pointing out how this reshapes & concentrates wealth that on the other hands allows for slave wages with no prospects for full time jobs.)
If AIs will affect the world as much as the internet (and do so with peoples data), then they should be seen as core infrastructure - and government or non-profit owned.
Monetisation of all the things is killing us.
anachrohack@lemmy.world
on 18 Jun 19:44
nextcollapse
I think there is no possible world where people are without meaningful work and are happy about it. Even if they collected $10,000 a month and got to spend all of their time doing hobbies and spending time with family, it would feel pointless and hollow. Why have a family? Why raise children? Why do anything if there’s no struggle, if you’re not the one providing for your kids? I think if AI replaces humans in the workplace, even with UBI, humans would cease to exist shortly thereafter as our lives will have become meaningless
Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
on 18 Jun 23:18
nextcollapse
Even if so - the definition of oneself is what that person gets paid for, not what that person enjoys doing (or even is just good at)?
(Especially with jobs, folk on LinkedIn will describe their job as anything but their actual everyday job, or lie/exaggerate about their job when with other people - so not even that “role” is true.)
… like, lmao, except if it’s like a weird grinding kink or something.
ICastFist@programming.dev
on 18 Jun 23:26
collapse
You have a very limited view of what life should, or even can be.
I think there is no possible world where people are without meaningful work and are happy about it.
–>
Even if they collected $10,000 a month and got to spend all of their time doing hobbies and spending time with family, it would feel pointless and hollow.
What is the difference between “hobby” and “work” if not what random people decide what is better monetised?
Both is labour & value added.
In a world where everyone gets enough money people could do what they actually want. So a CEO wouldn’t be “stuck” being a CEO if they don’t like that job & would rather be eg a baker. In the current system bcs of a huge pay divergence you get an unhappy CEO (who ofc won’t quit) and an unhappy baker that just couldn’t get a more suited paying job.
But we as a society would get a lot more out of life & cultural progression if people would be happy & satisfied at what they do (job=hobby).
Empirical evidence (even USA did extensive tests in the 60s) show that given a universal income (so basically no scarcity) basically nobody just sits around watching TV all day, everyone is productive (research, art, services, etc).
Imagine only having customer support or food industry workers that truly enjoy their job & want to do it.
How many prodigies are stuck at random dead end jobs with no prospects and life options?
Labour is what we all benefit from.
Work is what the employer/owner benefits from.
Huh I thought matrix was pretty new, and people used irc back then.
ICastFist@programming.dev
on 18 Jun 23:35
nextcollapse
Nothing like comparing a technology that took more than 10 years to get “released in the wild” and had several “killer apps” built using it very early on (email, instant messaging, web pages, online games) and many companies had no idea how to get money with it, vs. a “content generator” that is run almost entirely on promises of increased productivity and profit.
threaded - newest
the internet is actually useful and serves a purpose.
ai isn't useful at all and has no purpose.
It is very useful, just only in very few circumstances. 99% of what people are shoving it into, it has no place being there, but there are some things that it legitimately just does better.
I like to use it to convert recipes to grams.
I used it to select flowers to decorate my room with. In this case, it worked out excellent. The selection was done within hours, and I created a map of my room for arranging–all on a day off work.
AI is very useful and powerful as a propaganda device and a system to generate and disseminate disinformation, misinformation and non-information very quickly and very efficiently.
It was thought that the internet would do the same but that system only goes at the speed of humans and the whole system is regulated by humans … so as propaganda tool, it has worked better but not as well as predicted. Humans saw the the potential for abuse and fought back against it.
AI is like propaganda on cocaine … and there is very little to stop it other than our awareness of it … but the majority of everyone in the world don’t care to understand what they are watching is real or not. What that means is that AI is set to reshape how everyone thinks and how we all see the world.
We already saw Grok being used for this, though rather clumsily by stuffing the prompt.
If an AI company were behind the scenes fine tuning on specific political sentiment you would never know.
In fact there’s some evidence that later ChatGPT models are more right wing biased than early models (which were accused of being left wing).
Also important to note how much social media gets fed into these things and how astroturfed modern social media is these days, so even if not explicitly biased the well has been poisoned.
I’ve used it to learn how to read sheet music and help learn other skills I normally wouldn’t be able to.
I’ve used it to figure out a button on a vintage calculator which had multiple humans give up assuming it’s broken. Neither I, nor the AI knew what it was for but I could use it as a very willing conversation partner that didn’t grow tired of trying new things.
I’ve had it help me come up with an effective deep fry batter that fit my exact needs and gave a perfect result.
It’s usefulness is limited in many respects but if you have a rough idea of what you’re talking about it will (mostly) be helpful. Until it forgets things.
Are you not self aware at all? Who do you think the article is about?
That’s what they said about the internet in its infancy.
It’s the same sentiment towards immigrants that’s seen on the right.
The media have been running the exact same headlines. It feels weirdly like the corporate run media have an agenda to show us all the horrors of AI like they will take our jobs, they are going to collapse our society, they are a threat to our children, they contribute to organized crime. Same headlines every time.
I anticipate people here will be bothered by this statement just like if you say immigration isn’t really a big problem in r/conservative. The media is insidious. But I really think it’s a good opportunity to see how it shapes public opinion.
I find this false equivalence pretty disgusting.
That might actually reinforce my point
AI is an algorithm, humans are humans.
No, it really doesn’t. You can’t just say “I bet this opinion will be unpopular” and then when it does, in fact, turn out to be unpopular make the leap to say “this just proves how correct my opinion was”
No, it only proves how unpopular it was.
Even if all the same comparisons could be made between why people dislike genAI and why people dislike immigrants (they can’t, btw), one of those things involves flesh and blood human beings.
That’s intentional. They sensationalize to desensitize. Unlike the introduction of computers or the internet, AI will absolutely take far more jobs than it will create. Goldman Sachs predicts a 50% reduction in US jobs by 2045, and Republicans added a provision into the budget reconciliation that prohibits any regulation on AI for a decade, to ensure that prosperity goes to the corporations.
I’ve learned of one interesting pathway from ancap to socialism long ago, as you might have guessed, through Georgism, but more generally - every finite resource that can’t be produced, like territory and laws of nature, shouldn’t be owned and should be considered common property shared by communist means. What can be produced is private property without limitations.
Thus you can own guns, tanks, jets and air carriers, but you shouldn’t be able to fully own territory and patents, because that eventually leads to legally reinforced monopoly.
I think there’s a logical connection from that to what our future looks like and how it will have to be resolved. Unless we want a caste society.
Geoffrey Hinton agrees.
I would have no problem getting anyone at r/conservative to pull up similar data points and statistics to show immigrants are taking jobs, contributing to crime statistics or any other claim. It’s very eerily similar to the emerging opinion on the left when compared to opinions on the right towards immigrants.
Regardless of validity of opinion. What I’m noticing is the role the media has played on shaping opinion and fed it.
The media is very predictable for sure. They put on the rose-colored glasses for the pro argument, and sensationalize the worst fears for the con. Historically, the truth lands in the middle.
Unlike the topic of immigration, with the massive wealth inequality of today, anything benefiting corporations over the working class is far more likely to work out in their favor.
You’ll find conservatives rarely bother trying to do this because it’s simply statistically not true
Absolutely not true. I find more often they use lots of statistics. That’s the whole facts over feelings thing.
I don’t think I’ve heard anyone say that, and actually mean it, for the past 8 years…
Then you’re in a bubble. One of the most frustrating things about the right currently is they have a large network that is very good at sharing information. They have a much tighter grip of current events than anyone I’ve seen on the left. The left are miles behind on any current events. Whenever something is happening, I’ve been heading over to right wing spaces because as much as I hate it, they tend to know things much faster and in more detail then the left wing spaces.
Just look at Lemmy here. Most information is a post and then 100 comments of talking about how upset we all are and gob smacked. But there is no further insight.
When I go to right wing spaces, it is similar but i do get extra information like background details about who individuals were or what led to an event that isn’t in an article. It comes with tons of bullshit but I trust I know ways to verify information enough to spot the bullshit.
Tech itself maybe. But the money, the copyright and the politics. AI is filthy.
Of course, the things that haven't affected the internet or haven't been affected by it at all.
Comparing these two technologies seems somewhat silly
Imperial media has to push some kind of garbage to distract from their ceaseless support for genocide.
Whut
I believe they meant “imperialist”.
Search sucks now, LLMs are useful. Not as useful as tech companies claim it to be but yeah, most people will use it at some point.
That’s because search engines have reached the stage of enshittification where they no longer need to be good. Instead, they want you to spend as much time there as possible.
LLMs are still being sold as “the better option” - including by the exact same search giants who intentionally ruined their own search results. And many of them are already prioritizing agreeableness over “truthfulness.” And we’re still in the LLM honeymoon phase, where companies are losing billions of dollars on a yearly basis and undercharging their users.
Exactly. It will be ruined eventually when the shareholders come knocking wanting profitability.
This is something I think the ‘you have to use LLMs or you’re falling behind’ crowd are missing. Of course these companies want you to become dependent on their product, and unable to complete basic tasks without it, because then when they slap you with monthly fees and ads and tokens you won’t have a choice but to pay.
Use them if they’re useful, but don’t out source your brain. You’ll need it when the enshittification begins.
No it doesn’t. Fuck this fake news from these genocidal scumbags.
One worked, though. 🤷♂️
Yeah, but internet was for the people for decades.
(And it didn’t really cost nature as much. Or stolen from the people so much - even by current laws LLM companies do that illegally.)
“AIs” are getting their enshitification & monopolies pre-baked into their core bossiness models from the start.
Not to mention that AIs will definitely worsen inequalities all over the world (like assembly robots that replaced people but aren’t owned by people, and people still need to work 8h/day for decades for some reason).
<img alt="" src="https://preview.redd.it/automation-v0-pmbl92sqwuxc1.jpeg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=a298cc9c06dcdf112cb83dbbc0ec787a82d7bf17">
(This but AI. I’m not saying, there aren’t/won’t be other jobs, just pointing out how this reshapes & concentrates wealth that on the other hands allows for slave wages with no prospects for full time jobs.)
If AIs will affect the world as much as the internet (and do so with peoples data), then they should be seen as core infrastructure - and government or non-profit owned.
Monetisation of all the things is killing us.
I think there is no possible world where people are without meaningful work and are happy about it. Even if they collected $10,000 a month and got to spend all of their time doing hobbies and spending time with family, it would feel pointless and hollow. Why have a family? Why raise children? Why do anything if there’s no struggle, if you’re not the one providing for your kids? I think if AI replaces humans in the workplace, even with UBI, humans would cease to exist shortly thereafter as our lives will have become meaningless
You serious?
Yes, I think people define themselves by their roles, especially men
That’s a sign of toxic culture, not of men wanting to be defined by what value they can bring.
*monetary value
(in relation to toxic culture)
(bcs value that people actuality bring to society often isn’t fairly valued in terms of money or even not at all)
No it’s biology
Even if so - the definition of oneself is what that person gets paid for, not what that person enjoys doing (or even is just good at)?
(Especially with jobs, folk on LinkedIn will describe their job as anything but their actual everyday job, or lie/exaggerate about their job when with other people - so not even that “role” is true.)
… like, lmao, except if it’s like a weird grinding kink or something.
You have a very limited view of what life should, or even can be.
It’s not a normative statement. I don’t necessarily think it’s good. I just don’t think people can be happy being useless
You said people yearn for “the workplace”
No I didn’t
–>
What is the difference between “hobby” and “work” if not what random people decide what is better monetised?
Both is labour & value added.
In a world where everyone gets enough money people could do what they actually want. So a CEO wouldn’t be “stuck” being a CEO if they don’t like that job & would rather be eg a baker. In the current system bcs of a huge pay divergence you get an unhappy CEO (who ofc won’t quit) and an unhappy baker that just couldn’t get a more suited paying job.
But we as a society would get a lot more out of life & cultural progression if people would be happy & satisfied at what they do (job=hobby).
Empirical evidence (even USA did extensive tests in the 60s) show that given a universal income (so basically no scarcity) basically nobody just sits around watching TV all day, everyone is productive (research, art, services, etc).
Imagine only having customer support or food industry workers that truly enjoy their job & want to do it.
How many prodigies are stuck at random dead end jobs with no prospects and life options?
Labour is what we all benefit from.
Work is what the employer/owner benefits from.
Also the AI could automate away that man’s hobby…
The invention of the Internet didn’t come with realistic deepfakes, now we are in a post-truth society.
If UBI isn’t implemented, I expect there will be riots all around the world, rightfully so.
this is about utilization so its basically about how much folks are accepting it in usage rather than just words.
Ah yes 1998, the last year before Matrix.
Huh I thought matrix was pretty new, and people used irc back then.
Nothing like comparing a technology that took more than 10 years to get “released in the wild” and had several “killer apps” built using it very early on (email, instant messaging, web pages, online games) and many companies had no idea how to get money with it, vs. a “content generator” that is run almost entirely on promises of increased productivity and profit.
The two aren’t equivalent. One of them is an actual proven technology that definitively exists, the other one is still to prove itself.