this post was submitted on 13 Mar 2025
714 points (98.9% liked)

Fuck AI

2138 readers
30 users here now

"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"

A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
(page 2) 48 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Xerxos@lemmy.ml 3 points 3 days ago

AI has its uses: I would love to read AI written books in fantasy games (instead of the 4 page books we currently have) or talk to a AI in the next RPG game, hell it might even make better random generated quests and such things.

You know, places where hallucinations don't matter.

AI as a search engine only makes sense when/if they ever find a way to avoid hallucinations.

[–] Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Is the plan for AI to give tech plausible deniablity when it lies about politics and other mis/dis information?

[–] argon 4 points 3 days ago

Identifying the source of an article is very different from the common use case for search engines.

1:1 quotes of web pages is something conventional search engines are very good at. But usually you aren't quoting pages 1:1.

[–] Desistance@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

That's probably why I end up arguing with Gemini. It's constantly lying.

[–] jagged_circle@feddit.nl 1 points 2 days ago

I mean, the tech is changing faster than science can analyize it, but isnt this now outdated?

I dont use AI but a friend showed me a query that returned the sources, most of which were academic and appeared trustworthy

[–] DarkSpectrum@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I like how when you go pro with perplexity, all you get is more wrong answers

[–] NoSpotOfGround@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

That's not true, it looks like it does improve. More correct and so-so answers.

[–] ExtravagantEnzyme@lemm.ee 2 points 3 days ago

Go figure, the one providing sources for answers was the most correct...But pretty wild how it basically leaves the others in the dust!

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 days ago

Sounding plausible is all they're trained for. The whole setup was designed to avoid wishy-washy "I don't know" responses. Which is great, if you want to ask what Lord Of The Rings would sound like if Eminem wrote it, but we're treating that improv exercise like a magic eight-ball.

The most frustrating part of it is seeing people expect something else. And I'm including commenters here. 'I told the word-guessing machine to stop guessing words, and it just guessed more words!' 'Why doesn't the text robot know which icons this program has?' Folks, hallucination is the a technical term, and it's the function that makes this work at all. Everything it does is hallucinated. Some of that happens to match reality. Reality tends to be plausible.

The problem in full is that it's shoved onto the public and presented as science fiction. As if Google submits your questions to the Answertron 5000 which spits out a little receipt printed in all-caps. But there's no good-old-fashioned if-then logic involved. It's algebra soup. We gave up trying to be clever and did whatever got results. Now you can ask for anything you want, and it's usually close enough.

You can also ask how tall the king of Madeupistan is, and it'll probably play along.

Playing along is how it works.

[–] Halliphax@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

AI can be a load of shite but I’ve used it to great success with the Windows keyboard shortcut while I’m playing a game and I’m stuck or want to check something.

Kinda dumb but the act of not having to alt-tab out of the game has actually increased my enjoyment of the hobby.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›