this post was submitted on 07 Aug 2025
437 points (89.1% liked)

Technology

73905 readers
3874 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
(page 2) 47 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] vane@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

Maybe only those are worthy to survive this technology addiction disease.

[–] db2@lemmy.world 7 points 4 days ago

I'm none of those things and so-called AI is utter shit.

[–] Curious_Canid@lemmy.ca 4 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Actual computer scientists should also be included with those groups.

[–] NoodlePoint@lemmy.world 4 points 4 days ago

Because some are artisans and see that their work is being pillaged for AI "training".

[–] LordWiggle@lemmy.world 5 points 4 days ago

Same way the other way around. Remember when grok went full mechahitler?

it's because we actually listened to the plot of the matrix

[–] Bubbaonthebeach@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 days ago

I'm none of those however I believe they are right to view it negatively. The rest of us should be just a wary.

[–] Formfiller@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago

I think a lot of women feel this way too

[–] idiomaddict@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

•~intersectionality*-*_

[–] augustus@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Yes, generative AI is a normative neurotypical triangulation machine. Why would this be thought of favorably?

[–] zlatko@programming.dev 2 points 4 days ago

I think it's because the average person doesn't understand about five words in your first sentence. They can understand marketing bull that they're fed, though.

[–] deathbird@mander.xyz -1 points 4 days ago

"Some groups like bullshit less than others" says survey. "This is why bullshit is bad." says author. "Here's my post-hoc reasoning for why I got these results."

[–] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 0 points 4 days ago

Why the FUCK do we need to start splintering this with identity politics? Seriously name one good reason why this isn’t a distraction from the class war. Just one.

[–] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world -4 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Hi. Haven't read the article. Straight middle aged white guy here. I too also view AI negatively.

If trans, nonbinary, or disabled people view AI negatively, it's not because they're trans, nonbinary or disabled. It's because AI is terrible, and threatens (and already is proving to) make all of our lives terrible for the sole sake of giving billionaires a few extra pennies.

Though I will say, if trans, nonbinary and disabled people have any extra issues with AI making their life specifically worse, that's not caused by AI itself. It's caused by the wealthy CHOOSING to use AI to make their lives worse.

This doesn't need to happen. None of this needs to happen. Google doesn't need entire campuses dedicated to AI with special power requirements. This is all bullshit.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world -2 points 4 days ago (12 children)

Human being checking in here, I am appalled by the current usage of AI.

This study is bullshit.

load more comments (12 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›