Lemmy be like
-
yeah this shit's working out GREAT
AI isn’t LLMs and image generators
-
My dude, it sounds like you need to go out into the environment a bit more.
oh you have a spare ecosystem in the closet for when this one is entirely fucked huh?
https://www.npr.org/2024/09/11/nx-s1-5088134/elon-musk-ai-xai-supercomputer-memphis-pollutionstop acting like it's a rumor. the problem is real, it's already here, they're already crashing to build the data centers - so what, we can get taylor swift grok porn? nothing in that graph supports your premise either.
That's stanford graph is based on queries from 2022 and 2023 - it's 2025 here in reality. Wake up. Times change.
That’s stanford graph is based on queries from 2022 and 2023 - it’s 2025 here in reality. Wake up. Times change
Objective polling shows attitudes about AI were improving. Do you have any actual evidence to support your implication that this is no longer the case?
Being self-righteous, rude and abrasive doesn't mean you're correct.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Wait to power tripper db0 sees this. Crying that their ai photos in all their coms are cringe
-
You're getting downvoted for providing a well founded argument that should facilitate a broader discussion. Jesus Christ what are we doing here, people?
It's honestly rediculous, it weakens actual valid concerns with AI.
-
That’s stanford graph is based on queries from 2022 and 2023 - it’s 2025 here in reality. Wake up. Times change
Objective polling shows attitudes about AI were improving. Do you have any actual evidence to support your implication that this is no longer the case?
Being self-righteous, rude and abrasive doesn't mean you're correct.
You disregard everyone else's evidence but expect us to embrace your two year old data.
you disregard what mental health experts are saying this is doing to actual people.
You callously disregard the wellbeing of others for the benefit of aibros. Just because you're ignoring the evidence doesn't mean you're correct numpty. Being willfully ignorant of the harms caused to the environment from this just tells me you're profiting off of it, or a fanboy.
-
AI isn’t LLMs and image generators
then pray tell where is it working out great?
again, you have nothing to refute the evidence placed before you except "ah that's a bunch of links" and "not everything is an llm"
so tell us where it's going so well.
Not the meacha-hitler swiftie porn, heh, yeah I wouldn't want to be associated with it either. But your aibros don't care.
-
Wouldn't posting articles about AI making up bullshit support their claim that AI makes up bullshit?
You would be right if they weren't posting the article using grok as the source for the main claim.
The articles were "grok claims it was suspended from x for accusing isreal of genocide" thats fine. It is hypocritical when you post that article to every news, politics and tech community. There were a few communities where people commented that grok is full of shit but way to many communities treated it as if it was solid evidence.
-
then pray tell where is it working out great?
again, you have nothing to refute the evidence placed before you except "ah that's a bunch of links" and "not everything is an llm"
so tell us where it's going so well.
Not the meacha-hitler swiftie porn, heh, yeah I wouldn't want to be associated with it either. But your aibros don't care.
I was talking about public perception of AI. There is a link to a study by a prestigious US university which support my claims.
AI is doing well in protein folding and robotics, for example
-
your source about beef relies on poore-nemecek 2018, a paper with dubious methodology
-
You would be right if they weren't posting the article using grok as the source for the main claim.
The articles were "grok claims it was suspended from x for accusing isreal of genocide" thats fine. It is hypocritical when you post that article to every news, politics and tech community. There were a few communities where people commented that grok is full of shit but way to many communities treated it as if it was solid evidence.
I don't understand what you're saying. Solid evidence for what? What is the "main claim?"
This reads like you're treating a group of people with diverse opinions as a monolith and assuming what they think based on aggregated comments on their posts.
-
It's just a joke bro.
<.< The person I replied to was joking? Because it definitely doesn’t come off that way.
-
I don't understand what you're saying. Solid evidence for what? What is the "main claim?"
This reads like you're treating a group of people with diverse opinions as a monolith and assuming what they think based on aggregated comments on their posts.
No because its not being posted by 100 different people its two people and I know they are not Pro AI and I know they hate grok. So seeing them post AI claims as news is funny to me.
-
AI remains a broader field of study, an active field of study which tons of people are invested in, and they use AI to refer to the broader field of study in which they're professionally invested.
I’m just describing how language works.
No you're not. And you're not as smart as you think you are.
If everyone says a word means a thing
It's not literally everybody, and you know it, and you also know that LLMs are not the entire actual category of AI.
That is beyond pedantry.
That is how language works. Word definitions are literally just informal consensus agreement. Dictionaries are just descriptions of observed usage. Not literally everyone needs to agree on it.
This isn't some kind of independent conclusion I came to on my own; I used to think like you appear to, but then I watched some explanations from authors and from professional linguists, and they changed my mind about language prescriptivism.If you say "AI" in most contexts, more people will know what you mean than if you say "LLM". If your goal is communication, then by that measure "AI" is "more correct" (but again, correctness isn't even applicable here)
-
So are you saying that a slur (for Black people, for example) is linguistically "correct by definition" ? And it actually describes members of the demographic?
A slur is still a word.
I know youre trying to trap me in some stupid gotcha, but idk what you think that'd prove.What would you consider "linguistically correct" if not "follows grammar rules and conveys the intended meaning"?
If I say something absolutely heinous about your mother, does it stop being valid English just because it is morally reprehensible and fallacious? Of course not.
-
It's just as insane for you to expect us to read between the line of a 4 line comment that only present AI as harmful.
If you want to say that AI is both good and bad, that's fine but then say that. It doesn't have to be a book about it. You could have juste said AI can be harmful or good and that's fine. Don't act as if i'm asking for something unreasonable. You said one negative thing in a 4 line comment and feel personally attacked that we are unable to guess what positive thing you see in AI.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Your clearly didn't actually read the nuanced take, which is why I didn't provide a nuanced take in the first place.
I didn't expect you to read between the lines.
Rather, I'm shocked that you expect people raising the alarm about something to also promote all the good features of the harmful thing, in the same breath.Watch out! The Ford Pinto may explode while you're driving it! But wow, what a bargain! You'll burn to death, but you'll look chic in that fantastic modern styling, and the fuel economy is great! Take yours home today for only $8000!
Like can you imagine?
-
I was talking about public perception of AI. There is a link to a study by a prestigious US university which support my claims.
AI is doing well in protein folding and robotics, for example
ah what great advances has alpha fold delivered?
and that robotics training, where has that improved human lives? because near as I can tell it's simply going to put people out of work. the lowest paid people. so that's just great.
but let's give you some slack: let's leave it to protein folding and robotics and stop sticking it into every fuckin facet of our civilization.
and protein folding and robotics training wouldn't require google, x, meta and your grandmother to be rolling out datacenters EVERYWHERE, driving up the costs of electricity for the average user, while polluting the air and water.
Faux, I get it, you're an aibro, you really are a believer. Evidence isn't going to sway you because this isn't evidence driven. The suffering of others isn't going to bother you, that's their problem. The damage to the ecosystem isn't your problem, you apparently don't need water or air to exist. You got it made bro.
pfft.
-
ah what great advances has alpha fold delivered?
and that robotics training, where has that improved human lives? because near as I can tell it's simply going to put people out of work. the lowest paid people. so that's just great.
but let's give you some slack: let's leave it to protein folding and robotics and stop sticking it into every fuckin facet of our civilization.
and protein folding and robotics training wouldn't require google, x, meta and your grandmother to be rolling out datacenters EVERYWHERE, driving up the costs of electricity for the average user, while polluting the air and water.
Faux, I get it, you're an aibro, you really are a believer. Evidence isn't going to sway you because this isn't evidence driven. The suffering of others isn't going to bother you, that's their problem. The damage to the ecosystem isn't your problem, you apparently don't need water or air to exist. You got it made bro.
pfft.
wrote last edited by [email protected]ah what great advances has alpha fold delivered?
The ability to know how any sequence of amino acids will create a protein and what shape the protein would have. This also led to other scientists creating diffusion models which can be prompted with protein properties and they generate the sequence of amino acids which will create a protein with those properties. We also can write those arbitrary sequences into mRNA and introduce that into a local area of our cells.
But what do I know, I'm just an aibro. So, I'll listen to scientists who write peer reviewed papers which are published in scientific journals: AI-Enabled Protein Design: A Strategic Asset for Global Health and Biosecurity
and that robotics training, where has that improved human lives?
Well, Fukushima would be one place.
Now they can use disposable robotic dogs to do clean up and monitoring in high radiation areas. A job that humans were doing at the beginning. I'm sure those humans appreciate not having to die of cancer early.
Faux, I get it, you’re an aibro, you really are a believer. Evidence isn’t going to sway you because this isn’t evidence driven. The suffering of others isn’t going to bother you, that’s their problem. The damage to the ecosystem isn’t your problem, you apparently don’t need water or air to exist. You got it made bro
. If you can't win an argument just switch to insults, the tactic of choice for the ignorant. -
ah what great advances has alpha fold delivered?
The ability to know how any sequence of amino acids will create a protein and what shape the protein would have. This also led to other scientists creating diffusion models which can be prompted with protein properties and they generate the sequence of amino acids which will create a protein with those properties. We also can write those arbitrary sequences into mRNA and introduce that into a local area of our cells.
But what do I know, I'm just an aibro. So, I'll listen to scientists who write peer reviewed papers which are published in scientific journals: AI-Enabled Protein Design: A Strategic Asset for Global Health and Biosecurity
and that robotics training, where has that improved human lives?
Well, Fukushima would be one place.
Now they can use disposable robotic dogs to do clean up and monitoring in high radiation areas. A job that humans were doing at the beginning. I'm sure those humans appreciate not having to die of cancer early.
Faux, I get it, you’re an aibro, you really are a believer. Evidence isn’t going to sway you because this isn’t evidence driven. The suffering of others isn’t going to bother you, that’s their problem. The damage to the ecosystem isn’t your problem, you apparently don’t need water or air to exist. You got it made bro
. If you can't win an argument just switch to insults, the tactic of choice for the ignorant.wrote last edited by [email protected]Ah I see you read a wiki article and consider yourself an expert, again.
what has it DELIVERED?
In the not-so-distant future, the authors envision
my god man, what has it delivered?
But what do I know, I’m just an aibro
yes yes that's been established.
Now they can use disposable robotic dogs to do clean up and monitoring in high radiation areas. A
now you're just lying. the robots used in fukushima aren't AI trained.
you're so fulla shit it's dripping down your beard. gonna block you now, go lie to someone else.
-
Literacy what? Just let me watch something funny.
This is like the most pro-illiteracy thing I've ever read.
Do you feel you've become more stupid?
My muscles were weaker until I started training. As it turns out, the modern convenience that allows me to sit around all day doesn't actually make me stronger by itself.
It is people that are increasing inequality.
Yes, what if the billionaires simply chose not to, hm? Have I ever thought of that? Probably not, I'm very stupid.
I'm very stupid.
Hard agree. Lmao.
-
That is beyond pedantry.
That is how language works. Word definitions are literally just informal consensus agreement. Dictionaries are just descriptions of observed usage. Not literally everyone needs to agree on it.
This isn't some kind of independent conclusion I came to on my own; I used to think like you appear to, but then I watched some explanations from authors and from professional linguists, and they changed my mind about language prescriptivism.If you say "AI" in most contexts, more people will know what you mean than if you say "LLM". If your goal is communication, then by that measure "AI" is "more correct" (but again, correctness isn't even applicable here)
People still know what LLMs are, and they know that it's a subset of AI. If the internet is swamped with bots actively trying to set linguistic habits for marketing reasons, you're not required to perpetuate and validate that.
Shills and goons are trying to make "AI" refer to LLMs specifically. It's an ad campaign. You're not getting paid to perpetuate this stupidity.
