Lemmy be like
-
I don't see the relevance here. Inpainting saves artists from time-consuming and repetitive labor for (often) no additional cost. Many generative inpainting models will run locally, but they're also just included with an Adobe sub.
wrote last edited by [email protected]I don’t see the relevance here
Anthropic is losing $3 billion or more after revenue in 2025
OpenAI is on track to lose more than $10 billion.
xAI, makers of “Grok, the racist LLM,” losing it over $1 billion a month.
I don't know that generative infill justifies these losses.
-
Lol I didn't know that the anarchists over at lemmy.dbzer0.com are being corporate apologists. /sarcasm
wrote last edited by [email protected]Weird ... It looks like there's nothing stopping me from signing up for an account on dbzer0 even though I'm not actually an anarchist.
-
The fact that was the best you could come up with is far more damning than not even having one.
I'm keeping it simple, that's a solid good use case, and what millions of people use ChatGPT for.
-
This post did not contain any content.
I mean, it is objectively bad for life. Throwing away millions to billions of gallons of water all so you can get some dubious coding advice.
-
Commit to this. Let AI write all your responses from now on.
I never said I'm pro-AI?
-
Arent those different types of AI?
I dont think anyone hating AI is referring to the code that makes enemies move, or sort things into categories
LLMs aren't artificial intelligence in any way.
They're extremely complex and very smart prediction engines.
The term artificial intelligence has been co-opted in hijacked for marketing purposes a long time ago.
The kind of AI that in general people expect to see is a fully autonomous self-aware machine.
If anyone has used any llm for any extended period of time they will know immediately that they're not that smart even chatgpt arguably the smartest of them all is still highly incapable.
What we do have to come to terms with is that these llms do have an application they have function and they are useful and they can be used in a deleterious way just like any technology at all.
-
I don’t see the relevance here
Anthropic is losing $3 billion or more after revenue in 2025
OpenAI is on track to lose more than $10 billion.
xAI, makers of “Grok, the racist LLM,” losing it over $1 billion a month.
I don't know that generative infill justifies these losses.
The different uses of AI are not inexctricable. This is the point of the post. We should be able to talk about the good and the bad.
-
As in Genuine Leather?
It is leather, just 1mm of it.
-
The different uses of AI are not inexctricable. This is the point of the post. We should be able to talk about the good and the bad.
We should be able to talk about the good and the bad.
Again, I point you to "implicit costs". Something this trivial isn't good if it's this expensive.
-
Define people. Because obviously people don't here. The average person I talk to IRL on a daily basis don't know what it is, have never used it, and likely never will. And a system where the people currently pushing this wouldn't exist would certainly change things.
Your argument basically amounts to "nu uh".
The average person I talk to IRL on a daily basis don’t know what it is, have never used it, and likely never will.
ChatGPT.com is visited approximately 5.24 billion times each month. That makes it bigger than Twitter, Instagram, and even Wikipedia.
https://explodingtopics.com/blog/chatgpt-users
I don't use Twitter and don't know anyone that does but that doesn't mean it isn't popular.
Your argument basically amounts to “nu uh”.
ChatGPT has been the biggest Internet thing since Google. If it wasn't, we wouldn't even be talking about it here. I shouldn't have to quote statistics for something well known.
-
Run your own AI!
Oh sure, let me just pull a couple billion out of the couch cushions to spin up a data center in the middle of the desert.
I linked it in this thread but here it is again.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T17bpGItqXw
There is a huge open source community working on LLM's.
-
We should be able to talk about the good and the bad.
Again, I point you to "implicit costs". Something this trivial isn't good if it's this expensive.
The different uses of AI are not inexctricable.
Many generative inpainting models will run locally
Continuing to treat AI as a monolith is missing the point.
-
The different uses of AI are not inexctricable.
Many generative inpainting models will run locally
Continuing to treat AI as a monolith is missing the point.
The value of the modern LLM is predicated on trained models. You can run the models locally. You can't run industry scale training locally.
Might as well say "The automotive industry isn't so bad if you just look at the carbon footprint of a single car". You're missing the forest for this one very small tree.
-
The value of the modern LLM is predicated on trained models. You can run the models locally. You can't run industry scale training locally.
Might as well say "The automotive industry isn't so bad if you just look at the carbon footprint of a single car". You're missing the forest for this one very small tree.
Generative inpainting doesn't typically employ an LLM. Only a few even use attention transformers. It costs in the range of $100,000 - $10 million to train a new diffusion or flow image model. Not cheap, but nothing crazy like training Opus or GPT 5.
-
Evil must be fought as long as it exists.
OK, but you're just making yourselves lolcows at this point where you announce these easy-to-push buttons & people derive joy from pushing them.
Imitating AI just to troll is a thing now.So…that's a victory?
-
LLMs aren't artificial intelligence in any way.
They're extremely complex and very smart prediction engines.
The term artificial intelligence has been co-opted in hijacked for marketing purposes a long time ago.
The kind of AI that in general people expect to see is a fully autonomous self-aware machine.
If anyone has used any llm for any extended period of time they will know immediately that they're not that smart even chatgpt arguably the smartest of them all is still highly incapable.
What we do have to come to terms with is that these llms do have an application they have function and they are useful and they can be used in a deleterious way just like any technology at all.
If a program that can predict prices for video games based on reviews and how many people bought it can be called AI long before 2021, LLMs can too
-
For those who know
I need to watch that video. I saw the first post but haven’t caught up yet.
-
Yeah, go cry about it. People use AI to help themselves while you’re just being technophobic, shouting ‘AI is bad’ without even saying which AI you mean. And you’re doing it on Lemmy, a tiny techno-bubble. Lmao.
No one is crying here aside some salty bitch of a techno-fetishist acting like his hard-on for environmental destruction and making people dumber is something to be proud of.
-
My employer is pushing AI usage, if the work is done the work is done. This is the reality we're supposed to be living in with AI, just conforming to the current predatory system because "AI bad" actively harms more than it helps.
The current predatory system will raise the limit on the 40 work week if they're allowed to. 60. 80. You might not even get a weekend. Unions fought for your weekend.
AI does not fundamentally change this relationship. It is the same predatory system.
-
I've already mention drafting documents and translating documents
Once again it's not enough to justify the cost.
LLM translation are hazardous at best and we already a lot of translation tools already.
Templating systems are older than me and even so no one in their right mind should trust a non deterministic tool to draft documents.
