r/trueanon comment section defending "AI" (old.reddit.com)

submitted 1 day ago by trompete@hexbear.net to c/slop@hexbear.net

48 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The post itself is making fun of r/LeftistForAI, but then I veer into the comments and there's a lot of "AI would be good actually if weren't for capitalism."

First of all, people seem to be under the impression these so-called "AIs" can do a bunch of things they cannot do, which is really frustrating.

But my critique of the thing is so much more fundamental:

Anything worthwhile or interesting, whether it be written words, music, a game, whatever, is characterized by someone making an effort. Like they actually tried, they actually thought about it. They tried to look at the big picture as well as the details. Decisions were made about many things, should this be this way or that way? Things were tried, sometimes thrown out, sometimes kept. Someone went over it again and again.

Prompting a fucking LLM, or music generator or whatever, to just make a thing means that doesn't happen. Why would I engage with a thing that the "creator" didn't even bother engaging with?

Is nobody else feeling this way? They're all just missing the forest for the trees! WTF is going on?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] PKMKII@hexbear.net 3 points 1 day ago

My wife says she’s found the Adobe AI is actually pretty decent at taking large files with a lot of data presented in graphical form and summarizing it in text. Minimal generative content, only working with a narrow scope, so less opportunities for digital hallucinations.

[-] chgxvjh@hexbear.net 2 points 1 day ago

There is plenty of opportunities for hallucinations. Sometimes those systems just ignore the files as make up the results.

[-] PKMKII@hexbear.net 2 points 1 day ago

I said less, not none. That particular AI will give the relevant page citation(s) for any stat or claim it makes so you can correct for errors, but obviously that doesn’t account for any data it just skipped so there’s still a possibility for errors of omission.

I’ll also note, as I think this is an under appreciated aspect of the AI narrative, is my wife is not some AI sycophant. She hates when people use AI to “write” an email. However, she is horrendously understaffed and gets way too much work dumped on her because she’s the only one that seems to have any institutional knowledge and gets things done without drama. So she’d love to go through these documents manually. But when you’ve got eight proposals dumped on your desk, each hundreds of pages of dense technical details, and are told “get them all evaluated by the end of the week,” there’s not much of an option there. When there’s more fallout from not getting the review done in time than there is from some bad data making it through the analysis of the AI summary, it’s not surprising that people are using it out of necessity.