284

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 controversial new old
[-] lvxferre@mander.xyz 52 points 7 months 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.

[-] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 18 points 7 months 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.

[-] lvxferre@mander.xyz 22 points 7 months 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.

[-] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 15 points 7 months ago

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

[-] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 7 points 7 months 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.

[-] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 34 points 7 months ago

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

[-] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 17 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

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

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] theangriestbird@beehaw.org 32 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months 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.

[-] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 6 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Shouldn't we be glad they're publishing both viewpoints? (On a real, actively debated issue, I don't mean the "both sides" shit)

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] darkphotonstudio@beehaw.org 31 points 7 months ago

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

[-] echodot@feddit.uk 11 points 7 months 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.

[-] Kroxx@lemm.ee 20 points 7 months ago

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

[-] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 7 months 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)
[-] mspencer712@programming.dev 29 points 7 months ago

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

[-] Sabata11792@ani.social 26 points 7 months ago

Pandora's box can not be closed.

[-] Muffi@programming.dev 18 points 7 months 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)
[-] Marsupial@quokk.au 21 points 7 months 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.

[-] SkyNTP@lemmy.ml 39 points 7 months 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.

[-] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 22 points 7 months 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.

[-] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 7 points 7 months 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.

[-] BurningRiver@beehaw.org 13 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months 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)
[-] PeteBauxigeg@lemm.ee 7 points 7 months 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 (1 replies)
[-] MayonnaiseArch@beehaw.org 36 points 7 months 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

[-] Marsupial@quokk.au 11 points 7 months ago

If capitalism is shit you attack capitalism not a technology.

All the misplaced rage and wasted effort.

[-] Rozauhtuno 11 points 7 months 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.

[-] echodot@feddit.uk 9 points 7 months 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.

[-] Rozauhtuno 10 points 7 months 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.

[-] echodot@feddit.uk 6 points 7 months ago

The fact that it is useful technology though means they'll always have a fullback. It's not going to go way like bitcoin I guarantee it.

[-] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Bitcoin went away? It's at like $67k today. Personally I prefer sustainable cryptos but unfortunately Bitcoin is far from dead.

And sure, there's lots of data processing and statistics that's extremely useful. That's been the case for a long time. But anybody talking about "intelligence" is a con.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 18 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months 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.
[-] lvxferre@mander.xyz 15 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months 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)
[-] Kissaki@beehaw.org 13 points 7 months ago

the $80 billion start-up

lol, can you still call that start-up?

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Mac@mander.xyz 13 points 7 months ago

we should punish techncompanies for ruining the Internet with AI.

[-] darkphotonstudio@beehaw.org 7 points 7 months ago

The internet was ruined before AI.

[-] cupcakezealot 8 points 7 months ago

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

[-] umbrella@lemmy.ml 8 points 7 months ago

the solution here is not being luddites, but taking the tech to ourselves, not put it into the hands of some stupid techbro who only wants to see line go up.

[-] TheFriar@lemm.ee 9 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

But that’s the point. It’s already in their hands. There is no ethical and helpful application of AI that doesn’t go hand in hand with these assholes having mostly s monopoly on it. Us using it for ourselves doesn’t take it out of their hands. Yes, you can self-host your own and make it helpful in theory but the truth is this is a tool being weaponized by capitalists to steal more data and amass more wealth and power. This technology is inextricable from the timeline we’re stuck in: vulture capitalism in its latest, most hostile stages. This shit in this time is only a detriment to everyone else but the tech bros and their data harvesting and “disrupting” (mostly of the order that allowed those “less skilled” workers among us to survive, albeit just barely). I’m all for less work. In theory. Because this iteration of “less work” is only tied to “more suffering” and moving from pointless jobs to assistant to the AI taking over pointless jobs to increase profits. This can’t lead to utopia. Because capitalism.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] ultratiem@lemmy.ca 7 points 7 months 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
284 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37972 readers
333 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