• 1 Post
  • 74 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: August 11th, 2024

help-circle




  • pemptago@lemmy.mltoFuck AI@lemmy.worldOn the Luddites
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    based on nothing.

    Your first comment took a detour to follow a valid post with confirmation bias-led ad hominem. I think it was a safe assumption based on your defensiveness, but keep those blinders up.

    I often speak positively of specific ML and ai algorithms in this community, and I suspect the only downvotes I get are from ai fanboys who don’t like hearing their favorite chatbot is a grift led by billionaires.

    There’s no room for rational discussion about AI on Lemmy.

    Seems to contradict your first comment, but sure, we’re the irrational ones. We must be if we don’t like ai /s


  • pemptago@lemmy.mltoFuck AI@lemmy.worldOn the Luddites
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Do you have something to add, or do you just want to take a cheap shot at people who are critical of a thing you like?

    Most people here have a better understanding of ai than ai consumers i know. I find this community to be anti ai, as big tech hype/marketing brand, not anti ai as a branch of programming that includes ML and efficient, well-scoped models.





  • I appreciated her closing response and the distinction made between over-hyped LLMs and specific ML models.

    AI is such an interesting word because it’s sort of like the word transportation and that you have bicycles, you have gas guzzling trucks, you have rocket ships, they’re all forms of transportation, but they all serve different purposes and they have different cost benefit trade-offs.

    And to me the quest to artificial general intelligence has the worst trade-offs because you are trying to build fundamentally an everything machine, but ultimately it can’t actually do all of the things. So not only do you confuse the public about what you can actually do with these technologies, which leads to harm because then people start asking it for things like medical information and instead getting medical misinformation back.

    But also it requires all of these things that I described, the colossal resource consumption, the colossal labor exploitation. But there are many, many different types of AI technologies that I think are hugely beneficial. And this is task specific models that are meant to target solving a specific well scoped challenge, something like integrating renewable energy into the grid, weather prediction, drug discovery, health care, where you identify cancer earlier on in an MRI scan.

    These are all very task specific. It’s very clear what the use case is. It’s — you can curate very, very small data sets, train them on very, very small computers. And I think if we want broad based benefit from AI, we need broad based distribution of these types of AI technologies across all different industries.









  • Personally, I’d start with his wikipedia page, and the pages for his books. The people you’re talking to are likely caught in the fascism algorithmic funnel and have only watched videos rather than reading themselves. So they probably don’t have a deeper understanding than what wikipedia provides. That’s part of the appeal of conspiracy theories, that they’re bite-sized talking points that fit neatly together inside even the smallest minds.

    I’m willing to bet there are people who have already done the work for you and picked apart the books, and there’s probably conspiracy theorists who have come up with stories for each of those points. And now we’re approaching the point of Branolini’s Law, “The amount of energy needed to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than that needed to produce it”

    Beyond the scope of your Q, but if I could offer some advice: Instead of arguing, ask interrogating questions, as though you trust them and you’re genuinely trying to understand all the contours. You’ll quickly find many holes in their weak foundation. Success is bringing some awareness to how weak their info is. It’s like asking someone to show you around their messy apartment and now they’re a little embarrassed, so hopefully they’ll clean up or stop talking about it.

    Honestly, though, I’d have those convos in person (and worryingly, i have). Algorithmic social media is not built for deep thought or meaningful discussions. IMO It’ll just suck up time and energy that can be better spent elsewhere.