511
submitted 1 month ago by not_IO to c/microblogmemes@lemmy.world
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Catoblepas@piefed.blahaj.zone 122 points 1 month ago

It also demonstrates how much AI companies mislead the public on what their products can do. If a guy is selling lawnmowers that actually just generate grass clippings without mowing the lawn, you’re not an idiot for thinking it was going to mow grass.

[-] not_IO 20 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

furthermore. companies mislead journalists, investors, philosphers, influencers etc. most of which dont have a technical background but a lot of reach. They then carry their misunderstanding into the general public.

All these public "academic" panel debates on conferences about AGI being the next nuclear weapon and singularity. They lead to Highbrow publications, opinion peaces, books and blog articles, which then lead to tweets, memes and pop cultural references

[-] LongLive@lemmy.world 16 points 1 month ago

Huh.... wait... what if we make a box... generate electricity bills... Call it a crypto miner?

Cram a bunch of space heaters into a box. Convince investors that all the electricity it burns up means it's basically printing money. The building will inevitably burn down before anyone can investigate our claims.

[-] outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

But once someone explains it to you and you insist the grass was mowed, they show you the unmowed grass, and you still insist it's great for mowing lawns.

And also you're in the desert where you shouldn't even have a fucking lawn, and you plant more lawns because they're so easy to mow now

What do you call that? Because it's a bit past 'idiot'.

[-] Una@europe.pub 74 points 1 month ago

I mean, you literally have whole videos on YouTube made by GothamChess who shows how LLMs play chess. They literally spawn pieces from air, play moves that are illegal etc.

[-] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 57 points 1 month ago

Using an LLM to play chess is like using autocorrect to write a novel.

And that's the big problem with AI right now. People don't understand what it is, they just want the label slapped on to as many things as possible.

AI is the new IoT, it will be integrated into everything, less than useless for 99.9% of consumers, and yet, still wildly successful.

[-] WhiskyTangoFoxtrot@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago

Using an LLM to play chess is like using autocorrect to write a novel.

Better than Rowling

[-] SoleInvictus 9 points 1 month ago
[-] Fourth@mander.xyz 2 points 1 month ago

It's AI generated and absolutely hilarious.

[-] laranis@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 month ago

That is glorious. I've never wanted to read an entire book more.

[-] jsomae@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 month ago

I miss the days when AI was erratic enough to be hilarious. I haven't clicked onto AIWeirdness since chatgpt came out.

[-] buddascrayon@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago

It's because the venture capitalists who are sinking BILLION$ into these things are calling it AI even though it's not and literally never will be. And unfortunately, too many people are too stupid to understand that these aren't AI but Generative Adversarial Networks or GAN's for short. Which doesn't sound as sexy and "take my money please"-ish as Artificial Intelligence or ✨AI✨ does.

These will never be HAL9000 or Jarvis or even Roku's Basilisk. The stuff needed for that kind of "intelligence" doesn't exist in these things. And the sooner people come to realize that this is all just digital snake oil the sooner we can collectively get on with our lives.

[-] jsomae@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 month ago

Too many people are failing to understand that fqughds are actually woplels, and until they understand that, they are just going to keep wasting their money on 💫woplels💫.

Even though woplels have proven to be useful for some things, they're not as good as some people want them to be, so they're useless.

[-] outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

The brain dead morons who defend it and accuse me of just being a hater for understanding any part of it are the worst.

I literally no longer believe personhood is a thing because of how stupid and oblivious they're capable of being.

[-] Son_of_Macha@lemmy.cafe 3 points 1 month ago

Given how much it costs it will need to be ten times more successful than web search to even hop to break even. It's the biggest dot com bubble yet.

[-] Strider@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

'they' referring to people? Hell no. It's just hyped onto them whether they like it or not.

Yet another corporate hype wasting massive resources.

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 53 points 1 month ago

Hundreds of billions of dollars spent

No profitable product

No consistently usable product other than beginner code tasks

Massive environmental harms

Tens of thousands of (useful!) careers terminated

Destroyed Internet search, arguably the one necessary service on the Internet

No chance it's going to get better

Atari 2600 beating it at chess is a perfect metaphor. People who want to complain about it can bite its plastic woodgrain printed ass.

[-] kameecoding@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

No consistently usable product other than beginner code tasks

I mean, it's pretty good as a productivity tool for programmers as it eliminates a bunch of chore.

[-] outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Oh my god you 'people'. Did you not read what you replied to?

[-] jsomae@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 month ago

'people' in scare quotes since coders aren't people I guess.

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

Fine, we’ll stipulate to that. The conclusion is upheld.

[-] jsomae@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 month ago

Massive environmental harms

I find this questionable; people forget that a locally-hosted LLM is no more taxing than a video game.

No chance it’s going to get better

Why do you believe this? It has continued to get dramatically better over the past 5 years. Look at where GPT2 was in 2019.

No consistently usable product other than beginner code tasks

It is not consistently usable for coding. If you are hoping this slop-producing machine is consistently useful for anything then you are sorely mistaken. These things are most suitable for applications where unreliability is acceptable.

No profitable product [...] Tens of thousands of (useful!) careers terminated

Do you not see the obvious contradiction here? If you are sure that this is not going to get better and it's not profitable, then you have nothing to worry about in the long-term about careers being replaced by AIs.

Destroyed Internet search, arguably the one necessary service on the Internet

Google did this intentionally as part of enshittification.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] albert180@piefed.social 49 points 1 month ago

I'm quite sure that the guy understood pretty well what LLMs can do. He just wanted to deinflate all the bullshit promises by Techbros

[-] anomnom@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 month ago

Deinflate? Is that like uninflating? Or more like making something inflateless?

Tap for spoilerIt’s just deflate, and yes I feel like a dickhead for pointing it out.

[-] Sidhean@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

"Deinflate" feels like actively sucking all the air out instead of letting it out passively. Unrelated, I know, but I think words are so neat

[-] Shardikprime@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Man that sucks

[-] ieatpwns@lemmy.world 25 points 1 month ago

I bet the llm doesn’t even know what en passant is

[-] baropithecus@lemmy.world 13 points 1 month ago
[-] Honytawk@feddit.nl 8 points 1 month ago

It knows the definition though!

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 17 points 1 month ago

It literally doesn't. It has a pointer to other pointers that often times are marked as correct.

[-] outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)
[-] don@lemm.ee 16 points 1 month ago

By my best feelings, this shit is a bigger bust than the .com bubble, and I predate that latter shit by roughly twenty years.

[-] lautre@jlai.lu 14 points 1 month ago

LLM sucks at maths, sucks at chess, sucks at remembering stuff and being consistent ... They suck at everything a computer is usually good at.

[-] SparroHawc@lemmy.zip 8 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

It's a very specialized program intended to get a computer to do something that computers are generally very, very bad at - write sensible language about a wide variety of topics. Trying to then get that one specialized program to turn around and do things that computers are good at, and expect to do it well, is very silly.

[-] Pippipartner@discuss.tchncs.de 14 points 1 month ago

I'm quite sure that you could use a LLM to play chess and probably even successful, but you need to train it on chess notation of games instead of a pile of fanfiction and other copyright infringements. I have considered trying that but was turned off by how inaccessible LLM training is and how difficult it would be to get a sufficient amount of games written in proper chess notation. Obviously this would not be a real LLM, as it does not "speak", but I was curious how well this would work utilizing the same technique.

[-] Zwiebel@feddit.org 14 points 1 month ago

It's called AlphaZero and is the best chess engine to date

[-] anomnom@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 month ago

Thank you, I couldn’t think of the name, but I knew there was a machine learning chess bot out there that made cheating at online chess really common.

[-] Honytawk@feddit.nl 7 points 1 month ago

You shouldn't train an LLM for that, just any other type of machine learning.

You don't need text to play chess.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Takapapatapaka@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago

Okay, i think there is quite a misunderstanding here.

Some older versions of LLMs (chatgpt3.5-turbo-instruct) can play chess relatively well (around 1750 Elo) : here is a link to an article studying that.

Some points :

  • it is of course way worse than almost any algorithm designed for chess
  • one of the reason we cannot get these result back (at least not that good, here is a link to a blog post of someone making recent LLMs chatbots better at chess) could be that we do not have access to pure completion mode on models trained on selected data (where they could purposefully choose only good chess matches), and those are now hidden behind a chatbot layer instead.
  • it seems to reveal that models have a somehow accurate representation of the chess board when predicting chess moves
  • it seems to have a quite unique feat that is : if you feed them a prompt that say they play as a very good player, and then the beginning of a game with a blatant bad move (giving away a queen for example), they sometimes play the entire game with moves that purposefully give away pieces, as if they guess that the only reason they would lose a piece that easily is by purposefully losing them. It has close to zero utility, but it's interesting anyway.
[-] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 1 month ago

Asking ChatGPT to play chess is like asking someone who's not played Chess to play well, and then documenting how poorly it played. Like no shit the hammer did a bad job as a saw. You wanted it cut, you should have used the tool for the job.

ChatGPT isn't Deep Blue. It's not made for that. You're asking a word processor to calculate pi.

[-] DerArzt@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Yes but there are many out there that don't have this sort of understanding and believe the LLMs can do almost anything.

There people are the higher ups at large companies...

[-] olafurp@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

ChatGPT hallucinates moves so it'll almost always lose by the arbiter coming second time because of illegal move.

"Oh, you're right. Pawns can only move forward to open spaces or capture diagonally."

Proceeds to move pawn backwards AGAIN.

[-] jsomae@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 month ago

Nobody thought it would do very well. This was a software dev's little diversion.

We should praise attempts to make the public aware of the limitations of LLMs, not laugh at the guy who did this.

[-] ssfckdt 4 points 1 month ago

That's a very good move! To counter, you should follow these three principles:

  • Prepare a response move that will prevent a future good move.

  • Defend your own pieces and try to attack theirs.

  • Don't be too eager to sacrifice pieces in order to make short term gains.

  • Be prepared to sacrifice an unimportant piece to make a good gain.

If you want to make a good move, try Rook H8 -> G7.

[-] JackbyDev@programming.dev 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Alt textMe: Knight to C3

ChatGPT: You've played Knight to C3 — a classic developing move! That suggests we’re likely in the early phase of the game, possibly playing something like:

  1. e4 e5 2. Nc3

or perhaps you're playing the English or Reti and going for flexibility.

Let me know the full board state or moves so far if you'd like to continue the game or get commentary!

[-] arc@lemm.ee 1 points 1 month ago

You could train an AI just to play chess. Sites like chess.com have tens, hundreds of millions of games to use as training data. But the AI isn't "thinking" though, it's just being asked given this input, what's the most likely outputs and picking one based on its settings. Then the other player moves, the context updates, rinse, repeat. Such an AI would likely whoop most people's asses but experienced players might figure how to lead it down a path where it doesn't sufficient training data to play strongly.

But it's not a generalized LLM like ChatGPT where it's picking up a handful of chess games from god knows without knowing or enforcing the rules or anything else.

Likewise I bet we'll see AIs for poker and other lucrative online sports. I bet a lot of online casinos have amassed huge stores of data to produce AIs, as well as players using scraping or logs to do the same. I could even see online casinos running AIs in games because it's a way of taking money from players beyond the normal rake.

[-] JackbyDev@programming.dev 2 points 1 month ago

Casinos are such a scam. The few skill based games where you actually can manage to get an edge they just stop you from playing if you're doing well. We'll never see much use of poker/blackjack bots because if they catch on they'll just limit your winnings.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 11 Jun 2025
511 points (100.0% liked)

Microblog Memes

8707 readers
2197 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:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS