this post was submitted on 20 May 2025
236 points (92.4% liked)

Fuck AI

2818 readers
1103 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.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
VerbFlow@lemmy.world
MrMcGasion@lemmy.world
TootSweet@lemmy.world
BigMikeInAustin@lemmy.world
cynar@lemmy.world
themaninblack@lemmy.world
drmeanfeel@lemmy.world
pavnilschanda@lemmy.world
CriticalMedicine@lemmy.world
WonderfulWanderer@lemmy.world
Communist@lemmy.ml
eatCasserole@lemmy.world
SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world
NutWrench@lemmy.world
Soup@lemmy.cafe
iAvicenna@lemmy.world
Tinks@lemmy.world
wizblizz@lemmy.world
corus_kt@lemmy.world
Prandom_returns@lemm.ee
JimSamtanko@lemm.ee
TrickDacy@lemmy.world
TheFriar@lemm.ee
ArmokGoB@lemmy.dbzer0.com
HawlSera@lemm.ee
andrew_bidlaw@sh.itjust.works
MeDuViNoX@sh.itjust.works
33550336@lemmy.world
Nougat@fedia.io
Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world
Quill7513@slrpnk.net
ogmios@sh.itjust.works
glowing_hans@sopuli.xyz
e8d79@discuss.tchncs.de
ThefuzzyFurryComrade@pawb.social
236
Friendly Reminder (lemmy.dbzer0.com)
submitted 7 hours ago by miss_demeanour@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/fuck_ai@lemmy.world
20 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
top 20 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] TIN@feddit.uk 2 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

I'm in a really odd position, in that I've always been a futurist and massive tech fan. I thought that I would be signing up for any AI tooling as soon as it appeared, chip in my head, bionic eye, the whole nine singularity yards.

What I've found instead is a disgust with the concept, the way it's been implemented, the big tech arseholes at the top of the money grabbing companies that have driven it all to it's current omnipresent position.

I want my AI, under my control and with my best interests at heart doing helpful things for me at my behest and control. It's what I was promised in all those sci fi books, not this commercial pap.

[–] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 0 points 1 hour ago

I think "AI" is really insulting to people who want new interesting, innovative tech.

It's the same ML algorithms we have had for decades repackaged under an LLM and sold as "Intelligence"

It's marketing teams hyping up tech that has existed since the 90s in absence of real innovation.

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 10 points 3 hours ago

"It'Ll GeT BEttEr OVEr timE!"

*Proceeds to get worse over time.

[–] LouNeko@lemmy.world 11 points 4 hours ago

Generative AI is the equivalent of 2 stoners asking themselves "OK, what now?" a million times a second.

[–] yucandu@lemmy.world 12 points 5 hours ago

Ah but they badly mimic it very quickly!

I can be writing buggy code in a fraction of the time it took me to steal those code snippets myself.

[–] I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world 6 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

"intelligent", no they certainly aren't that.

"Wave of the future", unfortunately yes. They are. AI is entering nearly every field, and to ignore that because you desperately want to believe that's not the case is just burning your head in the sand. It absolutely is the wave of the future, it's just not a very good future.

[–] Grimy@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

I'm guessing its a typo but burning your head in the sand sounds better then the trafitional version

[–] glimse@lemmy.world 3 points 5 hours ago (2 children)

Not a big AI guy but the last line is dumb as hell. LLMs can be insanely useful when used by the right people.

Should have guessed it'd be a bad take by the "friendly reminder" opener but they clearly don't see LLMs as a tool, they see it as the end product which is just ignorant.

[–] pemptago@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 hours ago

Criticisms of unethically built models can't help but mention we're making these tradeoffs for generally crappy returns. A common counter argument I see now is this focus on a small dig while ignoring all other points. I also see this effort to distance while defending. You might not big a "big" ai guy, but showing up to say it can be useful while overlooking valid points tells me you're a regular ai guy.

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 2 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

What do you think they are useful for? Be aware I'm going to argue against any answer you give with fervor.

[–] glimse@lemmy.world 0 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

I want to be clear I'm not talking about the layman here (though I hear chatgpt is pretty good at creating quizzes based on notes you give it) - actual scientific work is being done with the help of LLMs

A concrete example of this would be www.OpenCatalystProject.com or IBM using it to discover a new COVID drug.

I'd bring up all the machine learning breakthroughs - of which there are likely hundreds - but I'd imagine you'd skewer me as they're not LANGUAGE models (which is fair as I said LLM, not ML).

What you won't hear me defending AI marketed to the masses. Pretty much any value it provides is offset by the things mentioned in the OP. But for science? Hell yeah keep up the good work

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 6 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (2 children)

You're right those arent fucking LLMs, stick with the program. Everybody else in here is talking about one specific thing and its not research oriented machine learning algorithms. It's bullshit generators.

[–] KeenFlame@feddit.nu 0 points 25 minutes ago

This is the exact same technology, as if using semantic reasoning will make your argument any stronger

[–] glimse@lemmy.world -1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

You were supposed to argue with fervor, not make stuff up..

You're wrong, they both use LLMs.

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 0 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Any research using LLM, not on it, is publishing bullshit.

[–] glimse@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Why double down on being wrong? My two examples aren't publishing bullshit.

If OP was only talking about chatgpt and the like, maybe they should have said that instead of lumping all LLMs together??

Either way I think we're done here, a shame you never actually argued with fervor

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (1 children)

Fine then:

  1. IBM - Not an LLM

  2. Meta Open Catalyst - Not an LLM

In fact the Open Catalyst in the paper specifically compares it's model to LLMs in that both different models improved with larger datasets (and increased processing power).

Eat shit

[–] glimse@lemmy.world -1 points 1 hour ago

  1. IBM DeepSearch. But you're half right, the drug I was thinking of was BenevolentAI...using an LLM similar to IBM.

  2. CatBERTa

But nice try. Eat shit, I guess

[–] baltakatei@sopuli.xyz 1 points 4 hours ago

So, a data-hoarding pirate who is also a prolific fanfic writer?

[–] Quacksalber@sh.itjust.works -3 points 6 hours ago

I watched a video lately suggesting that LLMs are more sophisticated than just simple text auto fill bots.