People bitching about AI is so much more annoying than the presence of AI.
Keep the downvotes coming, it doesn’t make your opinion any more interesting or valid.
Forcing AI into everything maximizes efficiency, automates repetitive tasks, and unlocks insights from vast data sets that humans can’t process as effectively. It enhances personalization in services, driving innovation and improving user experiences across industries. However, thoughtful integration is critical to avoid ethical pitfalls, maintain human oversight, and ensure meaningful, responsible use of AI.
Upvoting just because this reads as sarcasm to me and I’m vibing with it.
I cancelled my downvote because it sounds so funny now. It’s like OP asked AI to generate a sarcasm and AI was silently crying, "Dude, don’t dump me!"🥹
Tokenizer, token-tokenizer, you’re a tokenizer Oh, tokenizer, oh, you’re a tokenizer, baby You, you-you are, you, you-you are Tokenizer, tokenizer, tokenizer (Tokenizer)
AI don’t try to front, I-I Know just, just, what you are, are-are Model don’t try to front, I-I Know just, just, what you are, are-are
You got me goin’ (You!) You’re oh so charmin’ (You!) But I can’t do it (You!) You tokenizer
I kind of like AI, sorry.
But it should all be freely available & completely open sourced since they were all built with our collective knowledge. The crass commercialization/hoarding is what’s gross.
I mean you’re technically correct from a copyright standpoint since it would be easier to claim fair use for non-commercial research purposes. And bots built for one’s own amusement with open-source tools are way less concerning to me than black-box commercial chatbots that purport to contain “facts” when they are known to contain errors and biases, not to mention vast amounts of stolen copyrighted creative work. But even non-commercial generative AI has to reckon with it’s failure to recognize “data dignity”, that is, the right of individuals to control how data generated by their online activities is shared and used… virtually nobody except maybe Jaron Lanier and the folks behind Brave are even thinking about this issue, but it’s at the core of why people really hate AI.
You had me in the first half, but then you lost me in the second half with the claim of stolen material. There is no such material inside the AI, just the ideas that can be extracted from such material. People hate their ideas being taken by others but this happens all the time, even by the people that claim that is why they do not like AI. It’s somewhat of a rite of passage for your work to become so liked by others that they take your ideas, and every artist or creative person at that point has to swallow the tough pill that their ideas are not their property, even when their way of expressing them is. The alternative would be dystopian since the same companies we all hate, that abuse current genAI as well, would hold the rights to every idea possible.
If you publicize your work, your ideas being ripped from it is an inevitability. People learn from the works they see and some of them try to understand why certain works are so interesting, extracting the ideas that do just that, and that is what AI does as well. If you hate AI for this, you must also hate pretty much all creative people for doing the exact same thing. There’s even a famous quote for that before AI was even a thing. “Good artists copy, great artists steal.”
I’d argue that the abuse of AI to (consider) replacing artists and other working creatives, spreading of misinformation, simplifying of scams, wasting of resources by using AI where it doesn’t belong, and any other unethical means to use AI are far worse than it tapping into the same freedom we all already enjoy. People actually using AI for good means will not be pumping out cheap AI slop, but are instead weaving it into their process to the point it is not even clear AI was used at the end. They are not the same and should not be confused.
a rite of passage for your work to become so liked by others that they take your ideas,
ChatGPT is not a person.
People learn from the works they see […] and that is what AI does as well.
ChatGPT is not a person.
It’s actually really easy: we can say that chatgpt, which is not a person, is also not an artist, and thus cannot make art.
The mathematical trick of putting real images into a blender and then outputting a Legally Distinct™ one does not absolve the system of its source material.
but are instead weaving it into their process to the point it is not even clear AI was used at the end.
The only examples of AI in media that I like are ones that make it painfully obvious what they’re doing.
I like what we could be doing with AI.
For example there’s one AI that I read about awhile back that was given data sets on all the known human diseases and the medications that are used to treat them.
Then it was given data sets of all the known chemical compounds(or something like that, can’t remember the exact wording)
Then it was used to find new potential treatments for diseases. Like new antibiotics. Basically it gives medical researchers leads to follow.
That’s fucking cool and beneficial to everyone. It’s a wonderful application of the tech. Do more of that please.
What you are talking about is machine learning which is called AI. What the post is talking about is LLMs which are also called AI.
AI by definition means anything that exhibits intelligent behavior and it is not natural in nature.
So when you use GMaps to find the shortest path between 2 points that’s also AI (specifically called local search).
It is pointless to argue/discuss AI if nobody even know which type they are specifically talking about.
I’m talking about AI in the context of this conversation.
I’m sorry it upsets you that capitalism has yet again redefined another word to sell us something else, but nobody here is specifically responsible for the language we’ve been given to talk about LLMs.
Perhaps writing to Mirriam Webster about the issue could reap the results you’re looking for.
Yeah. I’ve been interested in AI for most of my life. I’ve followed AI developments, and tinkered with a lot of AI stuff myself. I was pretty excited when ChatGPT first launched… but that excitement turned very sour after about a month.
I hate what the world has become. Money corrupts everything. We get the cheapest most exploitative version of every possible idea, and when it comes to AI - that’s pretty big net negative on the world.
Is there a way to fight back? Like I do t need Adobe in my Microsoft Word at work, can I just make a script that constantly demands AI content from it that is absolutely drivel, and set it running over the weekend while I’m not there? To burn up all their electricity and/or processing power?
I think I see people complaining about ai more than I see ai actually in anything other than promo material.
Complaining over nothing.
What is making you interact with any of these things enough that it bothers you this much? Do you personally experience this every day or are you just mad about something someone posted online?
Most, if not all, of your examples can be ignored or disabled, already existed but were rebranded as AI©®™, or are seriously so inconsequential that wasting your time caring about it is just silly.
Don’t fall for the ragebait and confirmation bias posts.
- It’s in DuckDuckGo
- It’s in Google search
- It pops up on tons of websites as a chat bot
- It’s crowbarred into Windows now
- It’s Apple Intelligence which is baked into iOS 18 (disabling it gave me 20-25% of my battery back)
- It’s in Arc browser (easily disabled)
If you’re able to avoid it altogether and not be forced to constantly disable it everywhere, I commend whatever you’re doing. I see it scattered everywhere and I consider myself a niche user that runs their own Lemmy instance and doesn’t actively use any of the big social networks.
People are complaining because it’s permeating everything while offering little to no value to the end user. The massive divide has arrived where the value to the shareholders is all that matters, and the tech companies doing it aren’t even remotely thinking about the user experience or benefit. I’ve been a dev in tech for 18+ years and I’ve never seen the field this desperate and stagnant when it comes to good ideas.
There’s also the fact that it’s being used to replace artists and it’s basically a massive plagiarism machine. OpenAI tried to claim that their AI is the equivalent of a learning human, but actual learning humans aren’t trying to convert every single thought and interaction into billions of dollars worth of profit for corporations.
Maybe I am just good at ignoring it. I don’t use a whole lot of mainstream websites or, like you, big social media. I think people are just disproportionately annoyed by things they don’t have to use.
Chatbots aren’t anything new, if anything them being slightly better isn’t really a bad thing.
I think windows mentioned cortana copilot being there but I use openshell and outside of the day I installed windows 11, it hasn’t even mentioned it. Am I just not being targeted for ads for it? Literally not once has windows shoved it in my face but people complain about it frequently as if copilot was launching a full size ad window every time they turn on their computer.
The thing about it being little value to the end user does seem fair. I actually enjoy amusing myself with image generation but that’s about all I use it for. Don’t really care about whiny artists, especially since everyone complains that it isn’t good enough to be real art but is also somehow good enough to replace good artists (??).
Artists are legitimately upset because their work is being sucked into a vacuum to train AI without them being compensated or credited. If this was to train a tool that would become a publicly-accessible and free utility to anyone that wanted to use it for non-profit purposes, that would be an easier pill to swallow, but that’s not the case. It’s instead being used for profit by companies that didn’t actually create anything. Whether the artist is “good” or not is subjective.
Copilot being forced into Windows is only one side of it. The other issue was their Recall feature that uses AI. These things are optional now and can be disabled through third party tools and settings, but how long until they’re no longer optional, or they make opting out so convoluted that third party tools and instructions have to change constantly?
The other side of it that I haven’t mentioned is the insane power usage. It’s so high that OpenAI can’t even accurately estimate how much capital they need just to run a business that is already not profitable. It’s the largest amount of funding any startup has ever had to ask for. So in the wake of climate change, AI is a blow torch in a bone dry forest.
An example of AI adversely affecting everyone, even non-users: https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2024-ai-power-home-appliances/
For a field that is not profitable, it requires more capital than anything that has come before it: https://www.cnbc.com/2024/12/27/openai-needs-more-capital-than-wed-imagined-moves-to-for-profit.html
AI returns are dismal: https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2023/10/so-far-ai-hasnt-been-profitable-for-big-tech/
It’s a multi-faceted complaint and doesn’t simply end at the user-facing experience. It’s a waste of capital, a huge weight on an already suffering environment, and it’s entirely out of the hands of the working class. It’s far too expensive for anyone outside of billionaires to run. And all of that for what? Summarizing articles? Making silly imagery and making artists and authors even poorer?
It’s the equivalent of sucking up entire lakes that have been around for thousands of years, all to fill some pools people use maybe once a year.
Edit: here is a new fresh level of AI hell for you. Edit 2: better link for the Meta AI story.
