top 86 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 360 points 3 months ago (66 children)

I’ve been getting from interacting with LLMs…with doing more and more and more and more…is not healthy for me or good for the world. It is careless, and has disconnected me from where people are on this.

I think this is very honest and we shouldn't give someone shit for speaking up.

  • source
  • hideshow 66 child comments
  • [–] 149 points 3 months ago (8 children)

    This. AI and more generally algorithm dependence is an addiction and watching him struggle with it the past few years has been heartbreaking. Watching him try to bargain and rationalize an objectively misanthropic technology that grew out of a sphere that he was a major role in and did begin as an objectively beautiful attempt at building community and healthy dialogue is very disappointing. I don't hate or judge him. He tried to do something beautiful. He just didn't understand the Faustian bargain he made in the process. The systemic forces turning his work into poison.

    I don't judge him for wrestling with it. I'm sad for him. I'm sad for a lot of us. We're all working in a system that's slowly killing us to some degree or another. There is no ethically clean life in a system predicated on greed, gluttony and lies. His optimism may have slipped into delusional, but it beats the crushing cynicism that comes with naked realism.

    I don't think that we should lose hope, but the future can't look like this. His Icarus moment shouldn't be the end of his journey. I hope he finds himself and begins planting new seeds even if none of us ever live to see the shade of the trees that grow from them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [+] 4 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 child)
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago

    Yes. He doesn't want to admit, he's gone as far down this path as he responsibly can. He doesn't want to transition to the "producer" role, where he becomes a resource for a new generation that's seeking a future away from the old platforms.

    It's a bit like the oil man who knows his work enabled so much good, unable to also admit his product has a dark side, and it's time for us all to move on from it. That times changed and a new world is struggling to be born.

    I disagree about "edutainment" in a qualified way. We still need communicators and domain experts sharing their knowledge, and there's still a great deal of knowledge to share, but I don't think it's on YouTube (or TikTok). People talking out of turn on matters so far outside their expertise and experience they're effectively neophytes, and just as vulnerable to Dunning-Kruger impulses certainly doesn't help. I don't think that AI or better algorithms are going to save them either, that's a good way to end up lost in a psychotic hallucination. I don't know what it will look like yet but it isn't going to come from the tech giants. Unless Wikipedia wants to take a crack at it, they might be the only ones that could pull it off.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    But this is the first time there's been this significant of an impact on one's mental health(?) I'm unsure. It's so easy to get caught up in that dopamine hit where you feel like you did something. Its even more frustrating when you're forced to use it in work regularly, whether directly or indirectly (if you're coworkers are using it there is an indirect force to use it if you need to stay competitive and keep your job and feed yourself and your loved ones especially if your workspace is not healthy)

    Thought experiment: is it better to treat the AI as a contractor (fivver etc) who is doing the task you're asking rather than thinking of it as something you're doing? From a mental health perspective A contractor because you are only to talk a out the task and nothing else really. That way it's work could be more distant and you're less likely to associate it to your work and boost in productivity?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    No. This is a line we cannot cross and if it destroys us, so be it. I'm not against AI, or automation. But not these tools. Not these companies. Not these models. The question is death or death. So we learn to live without, or we die. There is no synthesis possible with this paradigm.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)

    The cats out of the bag, so what are we gonna do now. Like replace that but not this with any other tech you should stop using, say social media, good luck. So what are we going to do now?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    What do we do? We're doing it. We're asking questions, we're building communities IRL and in digital paces outside the bounds of the major corps. We use poison pills to make corpos that embrace these systems pay dearly. We give grace to those who sincerely pull back and we move on.

    Cocaine exists and it can be a major boost to productivity. But we don't have to use it. We don't have to live with its downsides slowly killing us and robbing us of our humanity.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 23 points 3 months ago (16 children)

    Agreed, this is new technology for everybody, we're allowed growing pains.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago (15 children)

    Its pretty fucking simple to not use it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 35 points 3 months ago

    I understand where you're coming from, but you could almost always say this about every kind of mistake every person has ever made, and then sit there wondering why humans ever make mistakes, you know?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 15 points 3 months ago (7 children)

    Then you're not critically trying to think and examine the implications of this new technology. And that's fine, we all can't do all the things but we can listen to the people around us without being pretentious tools who would say I told you so.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (6 children)

    Then you’re not critically trying to think and examine the implications of this new technology.

    I've been examining and thinking about artificial neural networks since ~2010.

    It is pretty fucking simple to not use an LLM.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    There was a point where it was pretty simple not to use the internet, too. This analogy drives a question: were those people who rejected the internet at the beginning better off in the long run, when compared to people who embraced it?

    Generative AI can be a very useful productivity tool. Choosing not to use an available tool is "easy", but is it wise?

    I find myself agreeing with the person you responded to; you don't appear to be thinking critically about the implications of LLMs/generative AI. That, or you are speaking more literally than it seems, and you mean, literally, that it's easy not to use AI, without commenting on how wise that decision may or may not be.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)

    you don’t appear to be thinking critically about the implications of LLMs/generative AI

    You don't appear to have a functioning brain.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    Hyperbolic insults don't help your case. If you did think critically about this, feel free to show your work and talk through your thought process.

    Generative AI is just a tool. Using it is not much different than using a thesaurus while writing. You can quickly tell when someone has over-used the thesaurus, and it affects the quality of the output, but that doesn't make it bad to use a thesaurus.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Good job you've literally not reflected on the adoption of tech.

    Its pretty fucking simple not to be an unempathetic prick, but here we are.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    And people could simply not work for major corps.

    And they could simply not buy plastic clothes from Walmart.

    And they could simply grow their own food.

    Etc etc.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 3 months ago (37 children)

    Hank Green has earned the right, with me anyway, to have his point of view heard. And frankly he has more credibility with me than the garden variety pitchfork-wielding anti-AI mob. I think Hank is a person who finds AI interesting and sees upsides as well as downsides. But the aforementioned mob is not interested in anything other than the emotional catharsis of railing against something they hate.

    Now ask me if the mob is in the room with us, because it probably is.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 37 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 3 months ago (29 children)

    His AI use caused him so many problems in his private life that his family had to intervene. His point of view is “This technology has had a negative impact on my life and the lives of the people I care about”.

    Your pro-AI spiel is a bit tone deaf here

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 29 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    There wasn't an intervention, he asked them about his AI use in response to the outrage and they agreed he'd been using it unhealthy.

    Seemed to me more along the lines of "do I have too much salt?" , "yeah you should cut back" ; Then "your coke problem is tearing this family apart"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 11 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

    He said they “did not pull any punches” which implies it was a more blunt conversation than you’re suggesting.

    Hank Green himself describes his relationship with AI the same way you would an addiction, and specifically mentions the dopamine reaction driving his use of it to a point where he became overwhelmed by it.

    He’s not describing a casual discussion about table salt, he’s literally describing a drug/alcohol addiction.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 21 points 3 months ago (22 children)

    But they didn't say anything pro-AI. At most they were anti-anti-AI mob, which is just reasonable, as is with any "mob". And I read mob here as mindless parrots that keep repeating talking points and hating for the sake of conformity.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • [+] -15 points 3 months ago (12 children)

    Being anti-anti something is being pro-something. That’s the beauty of the double negative.

    Also that’s just a very pro-AI user, so the intent can be inferred

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 3 months ago*

    You're conflating two different somethings. Anti-AI mob is not the same as AI. Being against mob mentality doesn't make you inherently pro AI.

    It's possible to be pro or anti mob mentality and AI in various different combinations.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    I’m anti anything mob. The fucking groupthink on certain issues is real.

    I’m also anti people who make shit up and then try to sell it as a long strings of “inferences.”

    And after having AI shoved down my throat at work for two years while my teammates get laid off, I’m pretty anti AI too. At most I have direct experience with it that teaches me it has some uses, like summarization.

    You’re full of shit. You’ve been told. And you know it by now. But you’ll probably bleat on with more of the same because it’s all you know how to do. Proceed, I guess.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 3 months ago* (2 children)

    lol sure pal. At least stick to your guns next time.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Brave showing, bravo. I’m glad someone came out of the woodwork to illustrate the monomaniacal mob behavior I was talking about. You did just perfect.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -3 points 3 months ago*

    Hmm I don’t remember mobbing anyone. All I did was reiterate what the man himself said, in the face of you trying to spin it as more pro than it was.

    When the guy says his AI use was causing him problems and he regrets it and wants to make a change, I believe him. Simple as.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 6 points 3 months ago (5 children)
  • [–] -3 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    That’s exactly how that works lmao. “Anti” means “opposite”, not some neutral third thing

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    anti-anti-AI ≠ pro-AI, it assumes there's only anti-AI and pro-AI and nothing in between.
    And the wording was clearly about the anti-AI mob as opposed to people who understand the dangers and benefits of AI. It's similar to the difference between a Gamer™ and a gamer.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    The user is not in between, they’re pro AI.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    So? That has nothing to do with the argument at hand, it's an ad hominem.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago*

    You think that a persons established pro-ai bias is not related to the inference of the bias of their ai-related comment?

    I… disagree. That would be directly related.

    And it’s of course not ad hominem in the slightest because an ad hominem is an attack on a person instead of an argument. That’s not happening here.

    Your comment reads like a high schooler who just had their first class on argument and logic and hasn’t quite got a firm understanding of either yet.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

    Being anti-anti something is being pro-something.

    Blatantly reductive. "Anti anti AI mob" means to be against the mob that is against AI, not to be for AI. Regardless of whether or not AI is a net harm, moral panics certainly are. You can oppose the moral panic while being for, against, or neutral towards AI generally.

    If you need to fuck around and misrepresent your opponents' arguments, you're not doing it right.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -16 points 3 months ago (8 children)

    You're on Lemmy... any statements about AI, Musk, trump, McConnell, etc that aren't over-the-top against them will be met with downvotes.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 3 months ago (5 children)

    Okay but why would anyone be anything but over-the-top against anything on your list?

    I mean, like, everything you listed is dog shit.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Because sometimes in life there are nuances and it is possible to mention one of those topics in a neutral manner, but the absolute hostility held here against anyone who tries to have a conversation beyond "_____ sucks ass!" is exhausting.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    I said nothing pro-AI. But by accusing me of that, you reveal where your own bias (and defensiveness) lies. So thanks for that.

    You’re also exaggerating the facts. They didn’t stage an intervention. He turned to his wife and brother and said “do you think my AI use is unhealthy?”

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -1 points 3 months ago*

    You’ve said plenty pro-AI lol. You don’t have to get so defensive about it, just own your position.

    I’ve exaggerated nothing. Hank himself said he’s spoken to both his wife and brother about his AI use and said they “didn’t pull any punches”, which implies there was a blunt conversation about it, if not two.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -4 points 3 months ago (5 children)

    You sound like you lick Grok and Gippitys silicon balls.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    Ok, I guess you were too busy fondling Gr0ks and gipeettys balls to type out a constructive response. Are these how you'd like them to participate in your silicon fetish?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 3 months ago

    For me it’s just another disconnected millionaire Youtuber. But he‘s kind of blaming AI or rather his relationship with LLMs for this dilemma instead of actually reflecting on himself. If he thinks simply abstaining from using LLMs will establish a connection to the people he‘s dead wrong and will likely fall back on AI in no time.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 55 points 3 months ago

    Hank has been an advocate for knowledge for far longer than LLMs have existed. His recent use of them is disappointing, but I fell like this does not discredit the work he has done throughout his career to push curiosity.

    What he does next will be important and will decide how I interact with his content going forward. It seems like he is aware of his missteps and is looking to make a change.

    I am not a perfect human and do not expect celebrities to be perfect at all times.

  • source
  • [–] 50 points 3 months ago (5 children)

    He’s been obviously struggling since he got cancer. He’s in remission now and that’s great but I’ve been watching him slowly slip into PTSD. I have medical PTSD, I have cystic fibrosis and had a double lung transplant in 2014 and I see him devolving the same way I did. I’m literally two days away from getting out of an inpatient trauma treatment center that I’ve been at for a month because I didn’t take the medical PTSD seriously because I didn’t realize I needed to, I think he is in the same boat. I think he was already spread way too thin then cancer happened and he’s stuck in a hyper reactive state which is exhausting and eventually leads to the more classic PTSD symptoms and he’s probably turning to LLMs to try to keep up as the PTSD drains his batteries and he’s unaware of it. I hope he gets help soon and he doesn’t wait for it to get as bad as I did, PTSD kills if you let it get away from you.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    I'm sorry that things got bad enough to require inpatient care, but I'm glad you were able to get some help — I hope it did actually help. I know from firsthand experience that one never fully recovers from PTSD, in the sense that you can't go back to how things were before. However, I also know that it's possible to continue living life with the psychological equivalent of a massive scar, even if it is still red and angry and often painful — but not really possible to when instead of a scar, you have an open, gaping wound.

    I hope you were able to make some progress towards healing, even if it'll take much longer to fully heal.

    I also appreciate your attempt to leverage your own experience to promote compassion for Green. I've not read the rest of the comments here yet, but I can imagine there are a lot of people with uncharitable stances towards the situation. I am pretty steadfastly anti-AI, but I think it's important that we consider the person at the centre of any problematic AI use

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)

    Why the fuck would you use AI to write this.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    I'm not AI, just struggling to articulate myself in matters like this. Though I can see why you thought it was AI — reading it back, I can see that there are a few phrases that are common AI-isms. I'm pretty opposed to AI use at the best of times, but I agree with you that it would be fucked up to use it for this.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)

    No Tricafta or any of the newer ones work for you?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    The last stage trials came out when I was in the ICU waiting for my lungs, it wasn’t an option I was too sick. That said I’m glad I got new lungs since I’m significantly healthier now than the people I know going the gene editing route, obviously survivorship bias is at play since I got great lungs but I’m very healthy these days, even if I did end up living in the ICU for 6 months, 3 pre transplant and 3 post, we joke I paid for them upfront since I hadn’t had any serious issues after I was discharged, other than the mental toll of course.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 176 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (11 children)

    What's scary to me is that Hank Green is a rationale, intelligent person with time, money, resources, etc. Everything someone could want to be successful at their passion. And in this case, the passion is literally explaining science. If his own family has to have an intervention on his AI use (which it seems like they did?) after he denied reciting AI prompts on video despite being caught red-handed (which it seems like he did?) what chance do normie script kiddy vibe coders have? Is this the future? Addicts with rotting brains and AI psychosis leading the planet to destruction?

    The allure of outsourcing your mental load to a chat bot designed to tell you exactly what you want to hear is too much. Everyone's getting high off their own supply.

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 26 points 3 months ago (5 children)

    Things are going to get a lot worse before they get better

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    When gen AI hits a job market that doesn't exist thanks to AI, I wonder what's going to happen.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    IMO we are still quite a long way off from it, but if/when it does become prevalent it will depend on how fast the greedy capitalists deploy it. If they do it fast enough there will be too many displaced with little to lose, which will lead to revolution.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 42 points 3 months ago* (1 child)

    It must feel godlike to manifest your will simply by speaking it. I can understand why that would addict people. This is exactly why they are pushing it so hard - they know it has this effect, people will demand it, they will fight for it. They will give over their enterprise and their personal lives to it, the way a drug or gambling addict gives over everything they have to it.

    With that kind of impact - especially early on, before people realize they’ve been taken - they can build enough momentum to corner all compute.

    No longer can we gather or organize without our names attached, without our intent scanned and analyzed, our location tracked, or our wallets closed. We will have to drink our verification cans, and we will have to be nice to Trump, or else they will see what you wrote on your iPad Cloud or your Google Pixel Light and then they will debank you, like waking up from the Matrix. “Go woke and go broke” was always a premonition about control.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 14 points 3 months ago

    I keep those power fantasies to my brain because I can tell the difference between a daydream and reality. I don’t care what AI could make me feel, I am never going to use it for anything if I’m aware of it.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 3 months ago*

    Those who are the most vulnerable to fall for the cult are a) those who have no safeguards or experience and thus don't see the signs that it is a cult, and b) those who see the signs and know for a fact it is a cult, but think themselves they can outsmart the cult.

    His overconfidence is the reason he is leaning so hard into AI. Because he thinks himself knowledgeable and smart enough to always know better than the AI slop. He is the perfect mark to fall for it.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago

    That's what's wild about this to me - disagreeing about AI usage with someone like Hank Green (and similar public figures) feels so wrong when he and his brother practically saved my ass in highschool w/ Crash Course. But ig none of us are immune to addiction.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›