1282
everyone hates AI
(lemmy.blahaj.zone)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 22 Feb 2026
1282 points (100.0% liked)
Microblog Memes
10998 readers
3015 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
RULES:
- Your post must be a screen capture of a microblog-type post that includes the UI of the site it came from, preferably also including the avatar and username of the original poster. Including relevant comments made to the original post is encouraged.
- Your post, included comments, or your title/comment should include some kind of commentary or remark on the subject of the screen capture. Your title must include at least one word relevant to your post.
- You are encouraged to provide a link back to the source of your screen capture in the body of your post.
- Current politics and news are allowed, but discouraged. There MUST be some kind of human commentary/reaction included (either by the original poster or you). Just news articles or headlines will be deleted.
- Doctored posts/images and AI are allowed, but discouraged. You MUST indicate this in your post (even if you didn't originally know). If an image is found to be fabricated or edited in any way and it is not properly labeled, it will be deleted.
- Absolutely no NSFL content.
- Be nice. Don't take anything personally. Take political debates to the appropriate communities. Take personal disagreements & arguments to private messages.
- No advertising, brand promotion, or guerrilla marketing.
RELATED COMMUNITIES:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
The fuck are all these comments? AI is shit, fuck AI. It fuels billionaires, destroys the environment, kills critical thinking, confidently tells you to off yourself, praises Hitler, advocates for glue as a pizza topping. This tech is a war on artists and free thought and needs to be destroyed. Stop normalizing, stop using it.
Same with the internet. Fuels billionaires, destroys the environment with data centers and cables, kills libraries and textbook research, spreads nazi propaganda. We need to stop using technology in general.
There are things you can do with the Internet that are impossible to do without the Internet. Everything you mentioned is very real harm that the Internet does to humanity in the world - even if you meant it sarcastically - but that harm has to be weighed against the benefits the Internet provides that can't be replicated by anything else.
There's nothing a LLM can do that a human can't. The only thing LLMs are good at is convincing managers to replace human employees with LLMs. Because even though LLMs do a worse job than any human employee, they're cheaper and won't unionize.
The cost-benefit analysis for society is very different.
Lets see a standard problem I'm randomly making up using a free AI, you tell me if this kind of thing can be useful to someone:
If I have a bucket that is 1 meter tall and 1 meter wide how much volume can it hold?
The volume V of a cylinder can be calculated using the formula:
V=πr2h
Where:
r is the radius, h is the height.
In this case, the bucket is 1 meter tall and 1 meter wide, which means the diameter is 1 meter. Therefore, the radius r is:
r=21 meter=0.5 meters
Now substituting the values into the volume formula:
V=π(0.5m)2(1m) V=π(0.25m2)(1m) V≈0.7854m3
Thus, the volume the bucket can hold is approximately 0.785 cubic meters.
Using llms for math questions is probably the worst usage for llms.
And all of this is easily calculated without ai. You can literally google it and let google do the math for you without ai.
Perhaps your right, though the AI also allows natural language or voice, and further explanations.
Its also eroding all the bullshit we used to do, like cover letters and things that had no reason to exist besides wasting someones time. So truth be told I'm a fan, even if it is a massively unprofitable bubble, I also recognize its limitations given its hallucinations so I understand it shouldnt be relied upon for useful work.
I won't argue about the value of explanation from a ~~lying~~ hallucinating machine.
But I like how your use case is "it does the things that I believe to be useless and time wasting for everyone involved. But instead of, pushing for the end of these time wasting acts, I waste a little less time with llms (instead of all of the time by not doing these time wasting acts) while still wasting the time of the reader." What an efficient use case! We should violate IP law, waste drinking water and energy for it!
The problem is many people liked how it was, it makes more work to do, makes it seem official. I believe in that book bullshit jobs, and think most people are winging it with performative bullshit.
What I saw recently at my work is people received something that looked like AI slop from the head boss and they laughed about it, which got back to the boss, who then defended himself that it wasn't AI.
So I'm hopeful that people are called out for wasting peoples time, and that long winded blobs of meaningless text become a firable offense.
What you've given is an example of a problem where an LLM is inherently the wrong tool.
See, variation is built into LLMs. They're programmed to evaluate probable responses and select from them on the basis of probability - to simplify ridiculously, if a particular word follows another 90% of a time, in 90% of the content it generates the LLM will have that word follow the other, and in the other 10% it won't.
If you give an LLM the exact same prompt multiple times, you will get multiple different responses. They'll all be similar responses, but they won't be exactly the same, because how LLMs generate language is probabilistic and contains randomness.
(And that is why hallucination is an inherent feature of LLMs and can't be trained out.)
But math isn't language. Math problems have correct answers. When you use a software tool to answer a math problem, you don't want variation. You want the correct answer every time.
To solve a math problem, you need to find the appropriate formula, which will be the same every time. Then you use a calculator, which always gives the correct result. You plug the numbers into the formula and calculate the result.
What I'm getting at is, if you use a calculator to do the math problem yourself, and you put in the correct formula, you'll always get the correct result. If you use a LLM to generate the answer to a math problem, there is always a non-zero chance it will give you the wrong answer.
But what if, you might ask, you don't know the correct formula? What if you're not good enough at math to calculate the correct answers, even with a calculator? Isn't this a time when the LLM can be useful, to do something you can't?
The problem is, the LLM could be wrong. And if you haven't looked up the formula yourself, from a reliable source that is not an LLM, you have no way to check the LLM's work. Which means you can't trust it for anything important and you have to do the math yourself anyway.
(This is true for everything an LLM does, but is especially true for math.)
And if you have looked up the formula yourself, it's just as easy to use a calculator the first time and skip the LLM.
Right? This is what I'm getting at. An LLM can do some of the same things a human does, but it's always going to be worse at it than a human, because it's not conscious, it's not reasoning its way to a correct answer, it's just generating a string of linguistic tokens based on probabilities. And math problems might be the clearest possible example of this.
Thats well put, I'm under no naive assumption that LLMs are AI. Though I do think youre discounting the usefulness, as it did give the right answer, which is a fine use for average people doing basic math or whatever project theyre working on. I'm under no delusion that its replacing workers, unless someones job is writing fancy emails or building spreadsheets, and I do still think its a massive bubble.
Yeah, I get that it seems like a fine use for average people doing basic math. The nonzero chance of error could end up not mattering. But it could matter very much, depending on the use case. If you're asking an LLM the volume of a bucket, it's not a big deal. If you're asking an LLM "how many milligrams of this drug is the correct dose for a 80 kg man", that's a big fucking deal.
If people don't know LLMs can't be trusted to give the corect answer, they're not going to realize they need to do the math themselves in important use cases. And that is certainly not something Microsoft and Google are encouraging people to learn.
Then there's the efficiency issue - Big Tech spent trillions of dollars to develop and train machine learning processors, which perform quadrillions of energy-intensive processes per second, and they're being marketed to do a job that a 99 cent solar powered calculator from the 1980s can do better.
God, I just realized tax season is coming up. And after all the layoffs and political firings and general dogebaggery at the American IRS, they're going to have to deal with people using AI to do their taxes 😆
Found the Mennonite.
t’s the same as any other commercial tool. As long as it’s profitable the owner will continue to sell it, and users who are willing to pay will buy it. You use commercial tools every day that are harmful to the environment. Do you drive? Heat your home? Buy meat, dairy or animal products?
I honestly don’t know where this hatred for AI comes from; it feels like a trend that people jump onto because they want to be included in something.
AI is used in radiology to identify birth defects, cancer signs and heart problems. You’re acting like its only use-case is artwork, which isn’t true. You’re welcome to your opinion but you’re welcome to consider other perspectives as well. Ciao!
The use in radiology is not a good thing. Hospitals are cutting trained technicians and making the few they keep double check more images per day as a backup for AI. If they were just using it as an aide and the humans were still analyzing the same number of picturea that would be fine but capitalism sees a way to save a buck and people will die as a result.
This isn't a problem with AI though, it's a problem with the people cutting trained technicians. In places where such incompetent people don't decide that, you get the same number of trained technicians accepting (and being a part of) a change that gives them slightly more accurate findings, resulting in lives being saved overall. Which is typically what health workers want to begin with.
That big ol list of things didn’t do it for you, huh?
That sensationalized list? No, not really.
Did you try reading the comment you just replied to?
It's in part because people aren't open to contradictions in their world view. In part you can't blame them for that since everyone has their own valid perspective. But staying willingly ignorant of positives and gray areas is a valid criticism. And sadly there are plenty of influencers peddling a black-white mindset on AI, ignoring all other uses. Not saying intentionally or not, again perspective. I'm sure online content creation has to contend with a lot more AI content compared to the norm. But only on the internet do I encounter rabidly anti AI people, in real life basically nobody cares. Some use it, some don't, most do so responsibly as a tool. And I work in the creative industry...
"I've never seen it it must not exist"
I work in a creative industry too and it is the bane of not only my group but every other company I've spoken to. Every artist and musician I know hates it too.
I never said it doesn't exist. I'm sorry people in your area are being negatively affected if so. But the point still stands. My experience is just as valid.
I'm pretty anti AI as it is a tool of the billionaire class to enslave the masses. Look up TESCREAL, its the digital eugenics billionaires and fringe philosiphers believe in and it is the driving force in the AI push.
That being said I can see a use for a focused, local LLM/AI assistant. I have to search a lot of confidential technical manuals, schematics and trust cases in my job. We are thinking about testing out Ollama to upload all our documents too to make searching them easier.
You are the exact person I didn't mean 😄 the first is a very valid reason to dislike AI.
Even before our current time, "nobody cares" is not a thermostat reading of what "really matters". It almost sounds like you believe people know what's best for themselves, when the truth of the matter is that humanity has long proved otherwise.
You sound like a cartoon supervillain, Lex Luthor ranting to superman about the common animals not knowing what's best for themselves.
Have you seen American society lately?
Republicans.
I don't believe that. What I'm saying is that these are all people I work with look very critically and skeptically at the world, as that's pretty much an inherent requirement for the creative industry. We all know what AI is and what it does, and most arguments against it hold no water to people with a realistic view of the industry to the point it simply cannot be black and white like some claim it to be.
There are a few good reasons to dislike AI, but those don't apply to all of AI. Some are value based, and other people have other values that are equally valid. And some can be avoided entirely. Like how you could ship packages with a coal rocket instead of a train on electricity, or just shipping less packages to begin with.
There is trust and experience between one another in the industry that we aren't using it unnecessarily, wastefully, and incorrectly, and AI is not anywhere near a requirement by consumers nor healthy minded businesses.
k
So do computers.
I find AI to be more reliable every day. Fail to see an issue of killing critical thinking. Also my experience, search engines are flooded with advertisements and garbage unrelated to my search. Can only hope the business world does not “Shittify AI in the same way.
70 years ago, it was predicted pay-television would replace advertisements. Instead television evolved to a fee based system and a higher ratio of ads. So you can bet a good thing will evolve in the same way.
How does AI fuel billionaires?
who owns the datacenters?
Why is that relevant? AI is a massive money loser.
they have somekind of plan, or maybe its all sunken cost scenario. Either way, they think they can get some benefit from it and they are so determined they are throwing insane amount of money in it even though there is no clear way to get any profit from it. So either they know something we dont or they are desperate to save their investments -> worse ai does, better its for all of us since once ai crashes the components stop being wasted on it, less electricity and materials are wasted on datacenters and best of all, all those fucking billionaires lose a lot of money they have invested or at least the investors who thought it good idea to support them lose and maybe dont do it again.
Just because they have a plan doesn't mean it's a good one or that it will work.
AI doesn't fuel billionaires, it drains their money.
yes, but i dont think billionaires are THAT dumb. They see some value in it for them that they deem worth the risk of losing all that money. So that is why its even more important that the ai crap fails and continues to drain their money.
Or maybe i'm underestimating just how much money they have and maybe even all this is just akin to losing a large portion but it doesnt matter because they can just exploit everything else.. But, if they get what they want then its bad for all of us no matter what.
It baits investors into giving them money, mainly.
Everyone's losing money on the deal, it's not like the billionaires are cleverly making money on AI while everyone else is losing money.