287
submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

As soon as Apple announced its plans to inject generative AI into the iPhone, it was as good as official: The technology is now all but unavoidable. Large language models will soon lurk on most of the world’s smartphones, generating images and text in messaging and email apps. AI has already colonized web search, appearing in Google and Bing. OpenAI, the $80 billion start-up that has partnered with Apple and Microsoft, feels ubiquitous; the auto-generated products of its ChatGPTs and DALL-Es are everywhere. And for a growing number of consumers, that’s a problem.

Rarely has a technology risen—or been forced—into prominence amid such controversy and consumer anxiety. Certainly, some Americans are excited about AI, though a majority said in a recent survey, for instance, that they are concerned AI will increase unemployment; in another, three out of four said they believe it will be abused to interfere with the upcoming presidential election. And many AI products have failed to impress. The launch of Google’s “AI Overview” was a disaster; the search giant’s new bot cheerfully told users to add glue to pizza and that potentially poisonous mushrooms were safe to eat. Meanwhile, OpenAI has been mired in scandal, incensing former employees with a controversial nondisclosure agreement and allegedly ripping off one of the world’s most famous actors for a voice-assistant product. Thus far, much of the resistance to the spread of AI has come from watchdog groups, concerned citizens, and creators worried about their livelihood. Now a consumer backlash to the technology has begun to unfold as well—so much so that a market has sprung up to capitalize on it.


Obligatory "fuck 99.9999% of all AI use-cases, the people who make them, and the techbros that push them."

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] [email protected] 52 points 1 year ago

For writers, that "no AI" is not just the equivalent of "100% organic"; it's also the equivalent as saying "we don't let the village idiot to write our texts when he's drunk".

Because, even as we shed off all paranoia surrounding A"I", those text generators state things that are wrong, without a single shadow of doubt.

[-] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago

Sometimes. Sometimes it's more accurate than anyone in the village. And it'll be reliably getting better. People relying on "AI is wrong sometimes" as the core plank of opposition aren't going to have a lot of runway before it's so much less error prone than people the complaint is irrelevant.

The jobs and the plagiarism aspects are real and damaging and won't be solved with innovation. The "AI is dumb" is already only selectively true and almost all the technical effort is going toward reducing that. ChatGPT launched a year and a half ago.

[-] [email protected] 22 points 1 year ago

Sometimes. Sometimes it’s more accurate than anyone in the village.

So does the village idiot. Or a tarot player. Or a coin toss. And you'd still need to be a fool if your writing relies on the output of those three. Or of a LLM bot.

And it’ll be reliably getting better.

You're distorting the discussion from "now" to "the future", and then vomiting certainty on future matters. Both things make me conclude that reading your comment further would be solely a waste of my time.

[-] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago

You're lovely. Don't think I need to see anything you write ever again.

[-] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

Occasionally. If you aren't even proofreading it that's dumb, but it can do a lot of heavy lifting in collaboration with a real worker.

For coders, there's actually hard data on that. You're worth about a coder and a half using CoPilot or similar.

[-] [email protected] 35 points 1 year ago

It will fail. Downvote me if you must, but AI generated erotica is just as here as machine-woven textiles.

[-] [email protected] 17 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

This is a post on the Beehaw server. They don't propagate downvotes.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[-] [email protected] 32 points 1 year ago

Knee-jerk stupidity. Not all AI development revolves around "tech bros".

[-] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago

I've never understood the supposed problem. Either AI is a gimmick, in which case you don't need to worry about it. Or it's real, in which case no one's going to use it to automate art, don't worry.

[-] [email protected] 22 points 1 year ago

The problem I have is when a gimmick is forced on me

[-] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago

Or it's both depending on the wide variety of actually unintelligent things labelled as "AI".

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[-] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

They should go ahead and be against Photoshop and, well, computers all together while they're at it. In fact spray paint is cheating too. You know how long it takes to make a proper brush stroke? No skill numpties just pressing a button; they don't know what real art is!

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] [email protected] 32 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I hate how the Atlantic will publish well-thought pieces like this, and then turn around and publish op-eds like this that are practically drooling with lust for AI.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] [email protected] 29 points 1 year ago

Plagiarism should be part of the conversation here. Credit and context both matter.

[-] [email protected] 27 points 1 year ago

Pandora's box can not be closed.

[-] [email protected] 19 points 1 year ago

I don't think this about trying to close it, but rather put a big fat sticker on everything that comes out of the box, so consumers can actually make informed decisions.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] [email protected] 22 points 1 year ago

Good thing about this is it’s self selecting, all the luddites who refuse to use AI will find themselves at a disadvantage just the same as refusing to use a computer isn’t doing anyone any favours.

[-] [email protected] 39 points 1 year ago

The benefit of AI is overblown for a majority of product tiers. Remember how everything was supposed to be block chain? And metaverse? And web 3.0? And dot.com? This is just the next tech trend for dumb VCs to throw money at.

[-] [email protected] 21 points 1 year ago

Yes, it's very hyped and being overused. Eventually the bullshit artists will move on to the next buzzword, though, and then there's plenty of tasks it is very good at where it will continue to grow.

[-] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

Except those things didn't really solve any problems. Well, dotcom did, but that actually changed our society.

AI isn't vaporware. A lot of it is premature (so maybe overblown right now) or just lies, but ChatGPT is 18 months old and look where it is. The core goal of AI is replacing human effort, which IS a problem wealthy people would very much like to solve and has a real monetary benefit whenever they can. It's not going to just go away.

[-] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Can you trust whatever AI you use, implicitly? I already know the answer, but I really want to hear people say it. These AI hype men are seriously promising us capabilities that may appear down the road, without actually demonstrating use cases that are relevant today. “Some day it may do this, or that”. Enough already, it’s bullshit.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

ChatGPT didn't begin 18 months ago, the research that it originates from has been ongoing for years, how old is alexnet?

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] [email protected] 36 points 1 year ago

Luddites were not idiots, they were people who understood the only use of tech at their time was to fuck them. Like this complete garbage shit is going to be used to fuck people. Nobody is opposed to having tools, we just don't like Musk fanboys blowing spit bubbles while trying to get peepee hard

[-] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago

If capitalism is shit you attack capitalism not a technology.

All the misplaced rage and wasted effort.

[-] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago

Good thing about this is it’s self selecting, all the technobros who obsess over AI will find themselves bankrupted like when the blockchain bubble bursted.

[-] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

The blockchain bubble burst because everyone with a brain could see from the start that it wasn't really a useful technology. AI actually does have some advantages so they won't go completely bust as long as they don't go completely mad and start declaring that it can do things it can't do.

[-] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago

they won’t go completely bust as long as they don’t go completely mad and start declaring that it can do things it can’t do.

Which is exactly what's happening.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[-] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

So this could go one of two ways, I think:

  1. the "no AI" seal is self-ascribed using the honor system and over time enough studios just lie about it or walk the line closely enough that it loses all meaning and people disregard it entirely. Or,
  2. getting such a seal requires 3rd party auditing, further increasing the cost to run a studio relative to their competition, on top of not leveraging AI, resulting in those studios going out of business.
[-] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

3. If you lie about it and get caught people will correctly call you a liar, ridicule you, and you lose trust. Trust is essential for content creators, so you're spelling your doom. And if you find a way to lie without getting caught, you aren't part of the problem anyway.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago

the $80 billion start-up

lol, can you still call that start-up?

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago

we should punish techncompanies for ruining the Internet with AI.

[-] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

The internet was ruined before AI.

[-] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

good to know that the anti gmo weirdos found another cause to rally around.

[-] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

I’ve just started hiding penises in my work. Your move AI.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 13 Jun 2024
287 points (99.7% liked)

Technology

39165 readers
194 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS