- bluesheep@sh.itjust.worksEnglish7 days
You shouldn’t trust billionaires at all. Even the “good ones”. You don’t get a billion <insert currency here> net worth without exploiting people
- nonentity@sh.itjust.worksEnglish7 days
I don’t trust anyone who is impressed by LLMs enough to consider them to be in any way adjacent to intelligence.
- cub Gucci@lemmy.todayEnglish6 days
You are absolutely right! Should I create a list of people who you should not trust?
- nonentity@sh.itjust.worksEnglish6 days
Why would that be necessary? They’ll freely and readily identify themselves.
- Eheran@lemmy.worldEnglish7 days
How do you define intelligence? If LLMs are not intelligent NO other animal could ever be considered intelligent and many humans in the lower percentiles too. And that percentile is only going up.
- brucethemoose@lemmy.worldEnglish7 days
I mean, if your argument is just semantics, that’s just… pedantic.
You could draw that line anywhere. The NPCs I play against in a strategy game could be “intelligence.”
You know what people mean. People are talking about ~anthropic cognition, which is clearly not what’s going on in current LLMs. They can do intelligent things, maybe they are an “intelligent” by some definition you define, but they are not even close to animalistic cognition.
- Eheran@lemmy.worldEnglish6 days
You and others here act as if this is some clear cut thing, while actually defining it is extremely hard and everything but clear cut.
I find it scary how many people here are blindly against LMMs directly (not the big companies behind them or whatever) with about as much irrational hate as the people they despise, like Trump. They act the same way. Saying LMMs are not intelligent is so absurd I am not sure how to go forward, such a statement is oozing with bias.
- brucethemoose@lemmy.worldEnglish6 days
I’m not againt LLMs. They’re usefull tools, and I’ve been tinkering with them since 2021, and generative ML before that. I have one loaded on my desktop pretty much all the time; DeepseekV4 0731 is running, right this second.
I use them all the time. I hack at them as a hobby; I know how useful they can be.
But you’re stopping just short of calling them “alive.” They’re not even close, not even in the same universe. They do tasks with intelligence or some variant of that, but they are not intelligent. And I’m not trying to be pedantic, that is a loaded term that implies cognition and adaptability they do not have.
They’re basically the same thing as weather prediction models, but for text output. They’re just a model.
And I think its very dangerous when people fall into the trap of thinking they are, fundamentally, more than that. That’s the fantasy Altman and such are selling the public, to con them.
Hence, the article above ^. What’s coming out of these leaders’ mouths does not match what people are getting, and they can tell. And that’s because the premise they’re being sold, of “artificial intelligence,” is a lie.
- Eheran@lemmy.worldEnglish4 days
It is not alive, why do you suspect I think that way?
And again, if those LLM are not intelligent we set an extremely high bar that even some humans will not reach. And it only gets higher.
- raze2012@lemmy.worldEnglish6 days
with about as much irrational hate as the people they despise, like Trump.
Thanks for outing yourself. Makes it easy to just skip the conversation and not bother trying to open up a conversation made in bad faith.
- nonentity@sh.itjust.worksEnglish7 days
Thanks for proving my point, your service is invaluable.
LLMs are explosively imprecise, statistically luke-warm, grey goo extrusion sphincters. They can’t produce anything novel, at best they can reveal potentially plausible information from the data they were trained on, which then requires proven domain expertise to validate.
Intelligence requires comprehension, a trait LLMs are intrinsically incapable of performing.
- nonentity@sh.itjust.worksEnglish6 days
Understanding, context[0].
Computers are particularly adept at iteration, and LLMs are an application that leverages this effectively. To wit, I’ll concede LLMs are ‘AI’, where that initialisation represents Accelerated Iteration, or in management as Amplified Incompetence, but as an example of Intelligence, that remains for those who are proud of their lack of the naturally occurring variety.
[0]: to frame a larger memory pool as a ‘context window’ is a misnomer, as context requires understanding and comprehension.
- RudeOnTuesdays@lemmy.worldEnglish6 days
Intelligence can be defined as sentience or sapience. LLMs lack both (they just regurgitate information and have neither understanding nor self-awareness).
- Eheran@lemmy.worldEnglish4 days
How can you tell they lack all of these things when people testing it shows these have it? So it appears as if, but you say that is not actually the case. How do you tell?
- khornechips@sh.itjust.worksEnglish4 days
I can write a bash script in five minutes that will say it’s alive if you ask, does that make it so?
6 daysFor starters, an LLM wouldn’t even survive in the body of a small insect. They’re incompetent at everything.
Prove me wrong. Make an LLM-powered insect that buys more LLM-powered insects. Have it demonstrate any fitness at all.
- Eheran@lemmy.worldEnglish4 days
If you train an AI to do it, I am sure it would completely destroy nature. It would find “bugs” like getting on an aircraft to reach new areas, teamwork to destroy any enemy etc.
I’m sure it wouldn’t. Prove it, you’re wrong. Existing bugs already do that stuff better. And “if you train it” is doing a lot of heavy lifting, since actual bugs can handle novel situations.
- Eheran@lemmy.worldEnglish1 day
Have you never wondered how some animal would completely take over if it was just a bit smarter? Example: A single fox can kill dozens of chicken. Imagine the chicken working together and attacking it, picking out the eyes etc. instead of literally not defending at all.
Or a herd of cow or whatever herd animal that could easily team up and trample/stomp/crush/… a predator but instead they all just run away and the slowest is dead.
Smarter is expensive! The brain will use more calories and cost more. LLMs are drastically less energy-efficient than natural brains. We’re one of the few cases where spending more on compute was worth it.
You’re describing eusociality, not intelligence. One might argue that ants have completely taken over, but they aren’t necessarily smarter than solitary wasps. LLMs only exist because of a huge economy behind them, and it remains to be seen how widespread they’ll be once they’re expected to generate a profit.
- 7 days
Most people don’t consider animals to have intelligence (outside of some apes) which is why they’re readily used as food.
They’re used as food because that’s how people have been socialized. Nobody would willingly eat a dog, but they would eat a pig. Pigs are more intelligent than dogs.
If you’re old enough you likely learned in school that animals aren’t intelligent or capable of consciousness or self-awareness. None of those things are true.
“Young people increasingly don’t appear to be incredibly dumb, survey finds.”
- Avicenna@programming.devEnglish6 days
billionaires tell people to love the thing they are trying to get them hooked on so that they can run a rampant monopoly and make some more billions.
If you remove yourself from the equation maybe there is some chance. So if you really love AI, perhaps fuck off.
- kepix@lemmy.worldEnglish6 days
my experience, that all my collegues who are aroubd 28-35, use a shitload of ai. younger generation is now using it instead of google search.
- Taleya@aussie.zoneEnglish6 days
That’s because they fucked the google search so that ai is the only thing that gives you what you’re looking for. Eventually. After you’ve argued with it.
- Canaconda@lemmy.caEnglish6 days
At least google’s ai will list the sources it’s allegedly drawing from so you can verify it’s hallucinations live.
I mean, the marketing people should have been able to tell management that too.
- SirEDCaLot@lemmy.todayEnglish6 days
Never underestimate me how out of touch business management can be.
There’s a saying- corporate consultants are people who charge millions to tell you what your employees and customers have been trying to tell you for free.
- billwashere@lemmy.worldEnglish7 days
Most everything I do is local but I don’t trust AI anymore than I trust any other tool. If it gives code that works or instructions to do what I need great. Even when it’s wrong I’m learning something new.
I totally agree about the billionaires. I absolutely don’t trust these dickheads running the shit show… Sam Altman, Jensen Huang, Elon Musk, Dario Amodei, Sundar Pichai, Satya Nadella, Mark Zuckerberg, Larry Ellison… Fuck everyone of these guys. Everyone of them is a rich asshole trying to scheme as much as they can out of the system. I think their end goal is to put people out of work so they can automate as much as possible so they don’t rely on anything else. If AGI or superintelligence arrives within the decade, whoever controls it controls the economy that follows. It will be such a game changer nobody is even close to prepared for it.
Go read “I Have No Mouth and I Must Scream” by Harlan Ellison, Hyperion by Dan Simmons, Colossus by D.F. Jones, or maybe Accelerando by Charles Stross. None of these end well.
- BigBoyShuanzee@aussie.zoneEnglish6 days
I’ve been in IT since 2007 I’ve been with computers since 1994 with a second hand MS DOS.
AI is 100 very good for scientists and people in the medical industry (I don’t know why, but I know they’ve all told me it’s good for them). Outside of the above… Everything else about AI is pointless… It’s just googling things slightly faster than I can google things.
- Hathaway@lemmy.zipEnglish6 days
Interestingly, in the medical field, I have seen a few headlines, but, I was talking to a guy who works for Mayo Clinic. His job is literally trying to quantify the effects AI is having with the doctors, and talking with him I said the same thing “at least it’s good for the medical field” and he replied with “who told you that? I would actually love to speak with them.” So, I’m not sure how effective it is in the medical field either.
- BigBoyShuanzee@aussie.zoneEnglish6 days
Very interesting, I work in IT and talked about how useless AI is and I got told off by multiple “scientists” because AI was revolutionising the way they did their research.
Granted this was on Reddit so maybe just people wanting to argue.
- HerbGrower@slrpnk.netEnglish6 days
Googling things a bit faster, but now all the sites it is searching are AI generated.
- 6 days
Scientists that use AI aren’t likely to remain good scientists for long.
- ludo@feddit.nuEnglish6 days
I mainly use it for comparing products, and finding tools/products that fit my needs (sustainability/longevity/value/complexity/learning curve/beginner friendliness). I find it to be really time saving for this particulqr purpose. Customer service agents should be forgotten by history ASAP. EDIT: customer service AI agents, is what I meant
- calcopiritus@lemmy.worldEnglish6 days
So your use case for LLMs is the first aspect of them that will be enshittified.
LLMs advocating for products that pay them is step 1 of incoming enshittification.
Also, anyone that has ever talked to customer service of any kind knows that the “automated” stuff is the absolute worst and you want a human most of the time.
Prepare to get downvoted and get critical comments. People really hate llms here. It’s just as annoying as the people on the flipside.
- ludo@feddit.nuEnglish6 days
While I understand the hate and also somewhat agree with it, there is no denying that it can be useful for some things. If those moments of usefulness are worth the damage to society and environment? Absolutely not. I am however guilty of using it anyway to cut research time ten or twenty times for a few particular use cases.
- ludo@feddit.nuEnglish6 days
I mainly use it for comparing products, and finding tools/products that fit my needs (sustainability/longevity/value/complexity/learning curve/beginner friendliness). I find it to be really time saving for this particulqr purpose. Customer service agents should be forgotten by history ASAP.
EDIT: Customer service AI agents, I mean.
Trust the parasite class! I mean, what could possibly go wrong, right…?
- UnLocoPoco@lemmy.worldEnglish6 days
With ai hallucinations…Ai fakery and the topmost reason being layoffs being attributed increasingly to AI…I don’t think so there’s anything much to love about AIs. When billionaires tell the society to love something… it’s because there’s 10000% profit for them in that and almost none for us masses.
- 6 days
AI is not making my life easier. My gas is not cheaper. Food is still the 2nd highest spend behind housing. Its just not a thing that people with grass to mow need beyond maybe a better search engine.
- son_of_darkness@lemmy.worldEnglish7 days
My previous work enforced the use of AI for everything besides wipping your own butt. I was a senior dev and adamantly refused to use it for ethical reasons.
Not once have I touched it, not once I felt I needed it. I said as much whenever I had meetings with eng. managers and I could provably argue that I was doing very fine without it, I was in fact as much or more productive than my AI addled colleagues and furthermore I found many severe bugs in their PRs. I saw the code quality and stability of my project take a deep plunge because of Claude. They said it was company policy to use… but because it was not on my contract and I was not falling behind on any of my responsibilities I answered I would rather be fired than to use AI. I never was. I kept at this for a year, and finally changed to somewhere where my judgement on when and where to use these things is more important than KPIs.
It’s not that I didn’t see a use case for AI - I saw very minor use cases for dashboards and quick insight into logs - but as much as I can I don’t allow managers and KPIs to have this much control over how I work and which tools I use.
