vividspecter comments on It's all aspirational isn't it?

Fuck AI

8,794 readers

7,930 active

1,022 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.

Rules:

Relevant posts only.
No bigotry.
No misinformation.
No NSFW/NSFL content without being labeled NSFW or being in an appropriately-labeled spoiler tag.
This isn't a place to talk about the cons and (supposed) pros of AI for different use cases. This is /c/fuck_ai .
Especially no AI advocacy.
No AI-generated content. If you want to post examples of AI failing hillariously, there are other communities for that like !ArtificialIgnorance@lemmy.ca .
Venting is part of the purpose of this community, but don't aim frustration or accusations at other users.
These rules are a living document that may change in the future.

You can help the mod team by making your reports detailed.

Effective reports:

"The third image is a well-known anti-semitic trope"
"Claiming that 'agentic AI' can outperform humans at all jobs is misinformation"

Less effective reports:

"Breaks rules"
"Misinformation"

founded 2 years ago

moderators

[–] vividspecter@aussie.zone 15 points 5 months ago (3 children)

I wanna beat them to death with my laptop, but when I see a new application for AI in cancer research, or a nearly century old math conjecture proven, I do feel a little optimistic, too.

I feel like these are such divergent types of machine learning that they have nearly nothing in common with the generative AI used in chatbots and code generators (especially that used to predict disease). Even if they may use some of the same underlying technologies and theory.

Which is why the overloading of the word AI to mean literally all of it is frustrating. So I guess I don't have a problem with using machine learning to target narrowly defined problems to gain new knowledge, versus outsourcing all of our thoughts and actions to chatbots and AI agents.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] MissesAutumnRains@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 5 months ago

Couldn't agree more. It makes me yearn for the days when AI meant NPC pathfinding in games, but deep in my bones I know that's where the problem started. My personal conspiracy theory is that basically every AI marketing department intentionally muddies the water to make the conversation more difficult so people can't just decide to massively regulate LLM services.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

[–] pemptago@lemmy.ml 1 point 5 months ago (1 child)

Agreed, except I'm not frustrated by AI being overloaded-- it makes sense to me that a well-known, two-letter acronym be highly inclusive-- it's frustrating that market dominance and marketing can just take over that acronym. LLM is a more accurate description than AI, but it would hurt their sales if most people understood it's a statistical model and didn't mistake it for a kind of intelligence.

I'm starting to think that those of us who understand this will probably fair better by forfeiting the semantics battle and making the distinction between LLM-AI and ML.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] vividspecter@aussie.zone 2 points 5 months ago*

I’m starting to think that those of us who understand this will probably fair better by forfeiting the semantics battle and making the distinction between LLM-AI and ML.

I'm now picturing a future where the word AI truly becomes universally hated, and LLM lovers start calling it ML again:

No, no it's not AI it's machine learning

Or we all just call it applied statistics, that ought to take the magic out of it, since normal people consider statistics to be boring and mundane and certainly not intelligent.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent