Lemmy be like
-
Siri has privacy issues, and only works when connected to the internet.
What are the downsides of me running my own local LLM? I've named many benefits privacy being one of them.
Voice recognition is not limited to siri, I just used the most know exemple. Local assitant have existed long before LLMs and didn't require this much ressources.
You are once again moving the goal post. Find one real world use that offset the downside. -
Much love
-
I find it very funny how just a mere mention of the two letters A and I will cause some people to seethe and fume, and go on rants about how much they hate AI, like a conservative upon seeing the word "pronouns."
One of these topics is about class consciousness, those other is about human rights.
An AI is not a person.
Someone with they/them pronouns is a person.
They have no business being compared to one another!
-
One of these topics is about class consciousness, those other is about human rights.
An AI is not a person.
Someone with they/them pronouns is a person.
They have no business being compared to one another!
It's a comparison of people, not of subjects. In becoming blind with rage upon seeing the letters A and I you act the same as a conservative person seeing the word "pronouns."
-
It's a comparison of people, not of subjects. In becoming blind with rage upon seeing the letters A and I you act the same as a conservative person seeing the word "pronouns."
wrote last edited by [email protected]Well if baseless bitching can keep homophobia alive and well, then it’s clear the strategy works.
It is always better to see and to write a sound argument, but barring that, perpetuating negativity is pretty effective, esp. on the internet.
I see what you’re getting at, though!
-
Voice recognition is not limited to siri, I just used the most know exemple. Local assitant have existed long before LLMs and didn't require this much ressources.
You are once again moving the goal post. Find one real world use that offset the downside.I've already mention drafting documents and translating documents
-
So everything related to AI is negative ?
If so do you understand why we can't have any conversation on the subject ?
Did I say that?
Show me the place where I said that. Show it to me.
Come on. Show me the place where I said everything related to AI is negative. Show me even a place where you could reasonably construe that's what I meant.If you're talking about why we can't have a conversation, take a long hard look in the fucking mirror you goddamn hypocrite.
-
One of these topics is about class consciousness, those other is about human rights.
An AI is not a person.
Someone with they/them pronouns is a person.
They have no business being compared to one another!
Calling AI not a person is going to be a slur in the future, you insensitive meatbag
-
I didn't like that movie back then, I thought it was too on the nose and weird.
But wow, this has aged like fine wine, that clip was amazing
When are we going to have actual violence against androids
Yes. When I first saw it, I thought it was soppy, depressing and weird. Now I'm just wowed by the accurate portrayal of human nature.
When someone says that plants are people, they will be respected as spiritual or written off as a weirdo. Saying that animals are people make for some really contentious debates. But saying that people are people is something wars are fought over. We'll get there once androids are enough like us.
-
The Internet kind of was turned lose on an unsuspecting public. Social media has and still is causing a lot of harm.
Did you really compare every household having a nuclear reactor with people having access to AI?
How's is that even remotely a fair comparison.
To me the Internet being released on people and AI being released on people is more of a fair comparison.
Both can do lots of harm and good, both will probably cost a lot of people their jobs etc.
You know that the public got trickle-fed the internet for decades before it was ubiquitous in everyone house, and then another decade before it was ubiquitous in everyone's pocket. People had literal decades to learn how to protect themselves and for the job market to adjust. During that time, there was lots of research and information on how to protect yourself, and although regulation mostly failed to do anything, the learning material was adapted for all ages and was promoted.
Meanwhile LLMs are at least as impactful as the internet, and were released to the public almost without notice. Research on it's affects is being done now that it's already too late, and the public doesn't have any tools to protect itself. What meager material in appropriate use exist hasn't been well researched not adapted to all ages, when it isn't being presented as "the insane thoughts of doomer Luddites, not to be taken seriously" by the AI supporters.
The point is that people are being handed this catastrophically dangerous tool, without any training or even research into what the training should be. And we expect everything to be fine just because the tool is easy to use and convenient?
These companies are being allowed to bulldoze not just the economy, and the mental resilience of entire generations, for the sake of a bit of shareholder profit.
-
It's funny watching you AI bros climb over each other to be the first with a what about-ism.
Providing a counterexample to a claim is not whataboutism.
Whataboutism involves derailing a conversation with an ad-hominem to avoid addressing someone's argument, like what you just did.
-
Much love
Veri smol
-
Just to clarify, do you personally agree that LLMs are a subset of AI, with AI being the broader category that includes other technologies beyond LLMs?
I come from a technical background and have worked in AI to help people and small businesses whether it's for farming, business decisions, and more. I can’t agree with the view that AI is inherently bad; it’s a valuable tool for many. What’s causing confusion is that 'AI' is often used to mean LLMs, which is inaccurate from a technical perspective. My goal is simply to encourage precise language use to avoid misunderstandings. People often misuse words in ways that stray far from their original etymology. For example, in Indonesia, we use the word 'literally' as it’s meant — in a literal sense, not figuratively, as it’s often misused in English nowadays. The word 'literally' in Indonesian would be translated as 'secara harfiah,' and when used, it means exactly as stated. Just like 'literally,' words should stay connected to their roots, whether Latin, Greek, or otherwise, as their original meanings give them their true value and purpose.
Depending on context, jargon and terminology change.
In this context, I'd agree that LLMs are a subset tech under the umbrella term "AI". But in common English discourse, LLM and AI are often used interchangeably. That's not wrong because correctness is defined by the actual real usage of native speakers of the language.I also come from a tech background. I'm a developer with 15 years experience, and I work for a large company, and my job is currently integrating LLMs and more traditional ML models into our products, because our shareholders think we need to.
Specificity is useful in technical contexts, but in these public contexts, almost everyone knows what we're talking about, so the way we're using language is fine.You know it's bad when someone with my username thinks you're being too pedantic lol. Dont be a language prescriptivist.
-
Stop drinking the cool aid bro. Think of these statements critically for a second. Environmental harm? Sure. I hope you're a vegan as well.
Loss of media literacy: What does this even mean? People are doing things the easy way instead of the hard way? Yes, of course cutting corners is bad, but the problem is the conditions that lead to that person choosing to cut corners, the problem is the demand for maximum efficiency at any cost, for top numbers. AI is is making a problem evident, not causing it. If you're home on a Friday after your second shift of the day, fuck yeah you want to do things easy and fast. Literacy what? Just let me watch something funny.
Do you feel you've become more stupid? Do you think it's possible? Why wouild other people, who are just like you, be these puppets to be brain washed by the evil machine?
Ask yourself. How are people measuring intelligence? Creativity? How many people were in these studies and who funded them?
If we had the measuring instrument needed to actually make categorizations like "People are losing intelligence." Psychologists wouldn't still be arguing over the exact definition of intelligence.Stop thinking of AI as a boogieman inside people's heads. It is a machine. People using the machine to achieve a mundane goal, it doesn't mean the machine created the goal or is responsible for everything wrong with humanity.
Huge increase in inequality? What? Brother AI is a machine. It is the robber barons that are exploiting you and all of the working class to get obsenely rich. AI is the tool they're using. AI can't be held accountable. AI has no will. AI is a tool. It is people that are increasing inequality. It is the system held in place by these people that rewards exploitation and encourages to look at the evil machine instead. And don't even use it, the less you know, the better. If you never engage with AI technology, you'll believe everything I say about how evil it is.
That's some real "guns don't kill people, people kill people" apologist speak.
The only way to stop a bad robber Baron using AI is a good robber Baron using AI? C'mon.
I know that's not exactly what you said, but it applicable.I work with these tools every day, both as a tool my employer wants me to use, and because I'm part of the problem: I integrate LLMs into my company's products, to make them "smart". I'm familiar with the tech. This isn't coming from a place if ignorance where I've just been swayed by Luddites due to my lack of exposure.
When I use these tools I absolutely become temporarily stupider. I get into the rhythm of using it for everything instead of using it selectively.
But I'm middle aged; which means both that I'll never be as good with it but also that it's harder to affect me long term, I've already largely finished developing my brain. I only worry that it'll be a brand new source of misinformation for my generation, but I worry that that (with the escalating attacks on our school system) it'll result in generations of kids who grow up without having developed certain mental skills related to problem solving, because they'll have always relied on it to solve their problems.I know it's not the tool's fault, but when a tool can do easily cause massive accidental harm, it's easiest to just regulate the tool to curb the harm.
-
The point is, most wouldn't. It's of little real use currently, especially the LLM bullshit. The communities would have infinitely better things to pit resources to.
The point is, most wouldn’t.
People currently want it despite it being stupid which is why corporations are in a frenzy to be the monopoly that provides it. People want all sorts of stupid things. A different system wouldn't change that.
-
Not really, since "AI" is a pre-existing and MUCH more general term which has been intentionally commandeered by bad actors to mean a particular type of AI.
AI remains a broader field of study.
It doesn't matter what you want, I'm just describing how language works.
If everyone says a word means a thing, then it means that thing. Words can have multiple meanings.
-
I completely agree. Using AI to refer specifically to LLMs does reflect the influence of marketing from companies that may not fully represent the broader field of artificial intelligence. Sounds ironic to those who oppose LLM usage might end up sounding like the very bad actors they criticize if they also use the same misleading terms.
I don't get to decide if the marketing terms used by the companies I hate end up becoming the common terms.
If I stubbornly refuse to use the common terms and instead only use the technical terms, then I'm only limiting the reach of my message.
OpenAI marketing has successfully made LLM one of the definitions of the term AI, and the most common term used to refer to the tech, in public spaces.
-
Semi non sequitur argument aside, your math seems to be off.
I double checked my quick phone calculations and using figures provided, Rockstar games with their office space energy use is roughly 18,000,000 (18 million) kWh, not 18,000,000,000 (18 billion).
I put the final answer in Watt hours, not Kw hours to match. ChatGPT used 10B watt hours, not 10B Kwatt hours.
-
If people use [slur] to refer to [demographic] that does not make it correct by definition.
Linguistically correct, and morally correct, are not the same thing.
-
No that is completely not what they are saying. Stop arguing strawmen.
It's not a strawman, it's hyperbole.
There are serious known harms and we suspect that there are more.
There are known ethical issues, and there may be more.
There are few known benefits, but we suspect that there are more.Do we just knowingly subject untrained people to harm just to see if there are a few more positive usecases, and to make shareholders a bit more money?
How does their argument differ from that?
