AI-driven

I look forward to the future, where we may see entire buildings aflame because someone thought a guesswork machine was the best thing to rely on for fire safety.

(Also, I don’t know if it’d apply here, but there are some known problems with infrasound.)

I think it’s fine if people are mad at both. By all means, encourage people to be angry at the responsible companies. But you don’t gotta defend the tech to do that.

Besides, as far as I’m concerned, strong anti-AI sentiment does actually help temper the harms of the tech and its owners. Is it a permanent solution? Obviously not, no — you’re very correct that the groups and people hard-pusing AI are much more important targets for ire. But two pressures are better than one.

I’ve been hearing news about this kind of thing for ages now. I’m not interested in hearing that the Trump administration is continuing its established record of not listening to federal courts.

What I am interested in hearing is what, exactly, the judicial branch is planning to do about it. Judges are “frustrated,” the article says; great, what then? Because as much as I’d love to be wrong, the answer thus far appears to be playing softball. I don’t think the degradation of the rule of law and the rise of authoritarianism is the appropriate time for such a strategy.

“You may flame me now, for I am full of love”

So, I was gonna disagree for various reasons, but this suggests you are posting specifically to incite arguments. Are you? Because that’s not what good faith looks like.

On one hand, that “everyday use” of AI is genuinely some of the most harmful use there is. People fall into delusions because of that shit, and even when they don’t they get massively overconfident about the answers they get, even despite significant error rates. Not to mention the privacy invasion that occurs with those systems, or the, you know, huge environmental damage.

In particular, this paragraph is doing a lot to make the bill sound better:

Under the GUARD Act’s broad definitions, a high school student could be barred from asking homework help tools questions about algebra problems. A teenager trying to return a product could be kicked out of a standard customer-service chat.

Yeah. These tools are dangerous. Fucking adults are using them wildly irresponsibly, for God’s sake.

On the other, this is very similar to the push for “protecting” kids from “pornography.” I don’t trust this to not result in massive proliferation of invasive age-gating systems regardless of any AI use at all. We’ll get the worst of both worlds, won’t we?

I think this kind of rhetoric is best saved for when AI is not currently one of the most harmful things in society today. Argue it’s a hammer all you like; people aren’t going to be receptive when that hammer is currently being used to beat their faces in, and making that argument at such a time isn’t exactly sympathetic.

Beehaw, and even Lemmy more broadly, is very anti-AI. Feel free to die on the metaphorical hill if you so wish.

Save the usefulness debate for someone else, though. If you still believe in LLMs even after all this time, then I can’t trust you haven’t fallen victim to cognitive surrender — and as such, I can’t trust you write your own posts. I’d rather spend my energy elsewhere.

Glazing AI on this site sure is a choice.

The CEO? Yeah sure, go ahead!

When you believe AI can do anything, you don’t worry about what sorts of access it’ll break things with. When you rely on AI to do work, you’re too interested in half-assing your job to consider what might go wrong. When capitalism never promotes people for their skill, understanding or caution, the former two issues proliferate.

Voilà, disaster.

This right here. Just about everything in here is awful, and implies decision making and thought processes that straight up do not and have never existed in any AI model whatsoever.

What happened was they threw an awfully-scoped statistics model at problems the program couldn’t possibly generate good outputs for, and surprise surprise, it generated bad outputs. The part that’s of interest is just how bad the output was, and even then, only in a schadenfreude-filled “it was bound to happen eventually” manner.

Trump’s shit, and I’m sure he’d be willing to do false flags, but I don’t think this was one. A post whose very comments address it as fake and two posts about a figure of speech taken overly literally just aren’t very good evidence.

Right. “Reached.”

I mean, accurate. They have reached a deal. But an important caveat is that the deal still needs to get cleared legally.^[1] Which is fairly likely — the court that would do so was the same one in which Alex Jones lost one of his costly defamation lawsuits, so it’s hardly a friend to him despite being in Texas. But even then, the idiot in question will be able to appeal the decision, so The Onion is hardly in the clear.

“This technology is the most dangerous and powerful thing in the world, and everyone should be paying attention to it,” says company directly profiting off adoption of said technology. Quelle surprise! Surely they can be trusted to be telling the unvarnished truth!

the closer we are to Trump having an excuse to do election fuckery.

That implies he won’t invent one regardless. I won’t be blaming people like this when he does.

In short, it’s fine. Take a breath.

Ehhhhh, that depends on how you take it. Personally, no, I’m not very worried about the legal aspect. But,

It’s still LLMs. FOSS communities have been better than average, but that bar is a low one considering coders generally have been using LLMs most of all. And LLM usage is reckless, not to mention presently harmful in numerous ways. (And yes, this means the latest models too. “Looks good” doesn’t mean it is good.) I’d just as soon FOSS not use the tech at all.

Considering the negative impacts LLMs have on so many facets of life today, that’s kinda the problem. Running it locally only solves some of those.

Fundamentally though, I just don’t want the tech involved in my life at all anymore. I don’t care if it has a niche use here or not. It can just fuck off.

You are aware translation services are available that are neither a local LLM nor Google-owned, yes? We had machine translation before ChatGPT existed, and I don’t think that tech evaporated in a sudden fire just because a more harmful option appeared.

The appropriate option for Mozilla would’ve been to not include AI at all. If they really, really couldn’t have swung that (they could’ve), then the second best option would be having all AI features set to off-by-default. Instead, we’ve got on-by-default. That is unambiguously a terrible idea.

I’m kinda agreeing with this, but not as much for the reasons others are stating here.

Lemmy reminds me of reddit moreso in the fact that there is a lot of conversation here that just… isn’t really conversation. People read a headline, immediately form conclusions, and slam one-line comments down that state the bare-bones of that without any thought, without even checking if someone else has said the exact same thing.

And I don’t think most of that’s bots, either. I think it’s the structure of the software. Lemmy seems to be trying to be “reddit, but federated” with absolutely nothing more changed, and I think that’s a massive mistake. I’ve seen what thread-based social media can be like if an attempt is made to actually improve on reddit, and there’s several methods of doing so that work. Methods that encourage healthy interaction and behavior instead of whatever drives numbers the most. Beehaw even already implements many of them in the form of its core principles and moderation strategy!

But that still leaves the software. And the software doesn’t seem to give a damn about the problems inherent to downvoting, upvoting, having visible votes on posts at all, having the easiest thing to interact with be the comment box, etc. Lemmy copies an engagement-oriented site without stripping the toxicity of that. And it shows.

I’m not planning to leave or anything right now – I came here for Beehaw and I still like Beehaw, and I don’t browse outside of it – but man if I don’t have my frustrations.