I’ve tried several types of artificial intelligence including Gemini, Microsoft co-pilot, chat GPT. A lot of the times I ask them questions and they get everything wrong. If artificial intelligence doesn’t work why are they trying to make us all use it?

  • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    16 days ago

    The idea is that it can replace a lot of customer facing positions that are manpower intensive.

    Beyond that, an AI can also act as an intern in assisting in low complexity tasks the same way that a lot of Microsoft Office programs have replaced secretaries and junior human calculators.

    • Kintarian@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      16 days ago

      I’ve always figured part of it Is that businesses don’t like to pay labor and they’re hoping that they can use artificial intelligence to get rid of the rest of us so they don’t have to pay us.

      • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        16 days ago

        Ignoring AI as he is like ignoring Spreadsheets as hype. “I can do everything with a pocket calculator! I don’t need stupid auto fill!”

        AI doesn’t replace people. It can automate and reduce your workload leaving you more time to solve problems.

        I’ve used it for one off scripts. I have friends who have done the same and another friend who used it to create the boilerplate for a government contact bid that he won (millions in revenue for his company of which he got tens of thousands in bonus as engineering sales support).

  • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    16 days ago

    Rich assholes have spent a ton of money on it and they need to manufacture reasons why that wasn’t a waste.

  • hungryphrog@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    15 days ago

    Robots don’t demand things like “fair wages” or “rights”. It’s way cheaper for a corporation to, for example, use a plagiarizing artificial unintelligence to make images for something, as opposed to commissioning a human artist who most likely will demand some amount of payment for their work.

    Also I think that it’s partially caused by people going “ooh, new thing!” without stopping to think about the consequences of this technology or if it is actually useful.

  • PenisDuckCuck9001@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    16 days ago

    One of the few things they’re good at is academic “cheating”. I’m not a fan of how the education industry has become a massive pyramid scheme intended to force as many people into debt as possible, so I see ai as the lesser evil and a way to fight back.

    Obviously no one is using ai to successfully do graduate research or anything, I’m just talking about how they take boring easy subjects and load you up with pointless homework and assignments so waste your time rather than learn anything. My homework is obviously ai generated anyway.

  • empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    16 days ago

    They were pretty cool when they first blew up. Getting them to generate semi useful information wasn’t hard and anything hard factual they would usually avoid answering or defer.

    They’ve legitimately gotten worse over time. As user volume has gone up necessitating faster, shallower model responses, and further training on Internet content has resulted in model degradation as it trains on its own output, the models gradually begin to break. They’ve also been pushed harder than they were meant to, to show “improvement” to investors demanding more accurate human like fact responses.

    At this point it’s a race to the bottom on a poorly understood technology. Every money sucking corporation latched on to LLM’s like a piglet finding a teat, thinking it was going to be their golden goose to finally eliminate those stupid whiny expensive workers that always ask for annoying unprofitable things like “paid time off” and “healthcare”. In reality they’ve been sold a bill of goods by Sam Altman and the rest of the tech bros currently raking in a few extra hundred billion dollars.

      • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        15 days ago

        Yes, that’s what they said. I’m starting to think you came here with a particular agenda to push, and I don’t think that’s very polite.

        • Kintarian@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          15 days ago

          Look it up. Also, they were pushing AI for web searches and I have not had good luck with that. However, I created a document with it yesterday and it came out really good. Someone said to try the creative side and so far, so good.

        • Kintarian@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          15 days ago

          The person who said AI is neither artificial nor intelligent was Kate Crawford. Every source I try to find is paywalled.

              • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                14 days ago

                I find that a lot of discourse around AI is… “off”. Sensationalized, or simplified, or emotionally charged, or illogical, or simply based on a misunderstanding of how it actually works. I wish I had a rule of thumb to give you about what you can and can’t trust, but honestly I don’t have a good one; the best thing you can do is learn about how the technology actually works, and what it can and can’t do.

                • Kintarian@lemmy.worldOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  14 days ago

                  For a while Google said they would revolutionize search with artificial intelligence. That hasn’t been my experience. Someone here mentioned working on the creative side instead. And that seems to be working out better for me.

  • Ænima@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    15 days ago

    It amazed people when it first launched and capitalists took that to mean replace all their jobs with AI. Where we wanted AI to make shit jobs easier, they used it to replace whole swaths of talent across the industry’s. Recent movies read like they were written almost entirely by AI. Like when Cartman was a robot and kept giving out terrible movie ideas.

  • kitnaht@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    16 days ago

    Holy BALLS are you getting a lot of garbage answers here.

    Have you seen all the other things that generative AI can do? From bone-rigging 3D models, to animations recreated from a simple video, recreations of voices, art created from people without the talent for it. Many times these generative AIs are very quick at creating boilerplate that only needs some basic tweaks to make it correct. This speeds up production work 100 fold in a lot of cases.

    Plenty of simple answers are correct, breaking entrenched monopolies like Google from search, I’ve even had these GPTs take input text and summarize it quickly - at different granularity for quick skimming. There’s a lot of things that can be worthwhile out of these AIs. They can speed up workflows significantly.

    • Kintarian@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      16 days ago

      I’m a simple man. I just want to look up a quick bit of information. I ask the AI where I can find a setting in an app. It gives me the wrong information and the wrong links. That’s great that you can do all that, but for the average person, it’s kind of useless. At least it’s useless to me.

      • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        15 days ago

        You aren’t really using it for its intended purpose. It’s supposed to be used to synthesize general information. It only knows what people talk about; if the subject is particularly specific, like the settings in one app, it will not give you useful answers.

      • kitnaht@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        15 days ago

        So you got the wrong information about an app once. When a GPT is scoring higher than 97% of human test takers on the SAT and other standardized testing - what does that tell you about average human intelligence?

        The thing about GPTs is that they are just word predictors. Lots of time when asked super specific questions about small subjects that people aren’t talking about - yeah - they’ll hallucinate. But they’re really good at condensing, categorizing, and regurgitating a wide range of topics quickly; which is amazing for most people.

        • Kintarian@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          15 days ago

          It’s not once. It has become such an annoyance that I quit using and asked what the big deal is. I’m sure for creative and computer nerd stuff it’s great, but for regular people sitting at home listening to how awesome AI is and being underwhelmed it’s not great. They keep shoving it down our throats and plain old people are bailing.

          • kitnaht@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            15 days ago

            Yeah, see that’s the kicker. Calling this “computer nerd stuff” just gives away your real thinking on the matter. My high school daughters use this to finish their essay work quickly, and they don’t really know jack about computers.

            You’re right that old people are bailing - they tend to. They’re ignorant, they don’t like to learn new and better ways of doing things, they’ve raped our economy and expect everything to be done for them. People who embrace this stuff will simply run circles around those who don’t. That’s fine. Luddites exist in every society.

          • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            15 days ago

            tl;dr: It’s useful, but not necessarily for what businesses are trying to convince you it’s useful for

    • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      15 days ago

      Yeah, I feel like people who have very strong opinions about what AI should be used for also tend to ignore the facts of what it can actually do. It’s possible for something to be both potentially destructive and used to excess for profit, and also an incredible technical achievement that could transform many aspects of our life. Don’t ignore facts about something just because you dislike it.

  • Kramkar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    15 days ago

    It’s understandable to feel frustrated when AI systems give incorrect or unsatisfactory responses. Despite these setbacks, there are several reasons why AI continues to be heavily promoted and integrated into various technologies:

    1. Potential and Progress: AI is constantly evolving and improving. While current models are not perfect, they have shown incredible potential across a wide range of fields, from healthcare to finance, education, and beyond. Developers are working to refine these systems, and over time, they are expected to become more accurate, reliable, and useful.

    2. Efficiency and Automation: AI can automate repetitive tasks and increase productivity. In areas like customer service, data analysis, and workflow automation, AI has proven valuable by saving time and resources, allowing humans to focus on more complex and creative tasks.

    3. Enhancing Decision-Making: AI systems can process vast amounts of data faster than humans, helping in decision-making processes that require analyzing patterns, trends, or large datasets. This is particularly beneficial in industries like finance, healthcare (e.g., medical diagnostics), and research.

    4. Customization and Personalization: AI can provide tailored experiences for users, such as personalized recommendations in streaming services, shopping, and social media. These applications can make services more user-friendly and customized to individual preferences.

    5. Ubiquity of Data: With the explosion of data in the digital age, AI is seen as a powerful tool for making sense of it. From predictive analytics to understanding consumer behavior, AI helps manage and interpret the immense data we generate.

    6. Learning and Adaptation: Even though current AI systems like Gemini, ChatGPT, and Microsoft Co-pilot make mistakes, they also learn from user interactions. Continuous feedback and training improve their performance over time, helping them better respond to queries and challenges.

    7. Broader Vision: The development of AI is driven by the belief that, in the long term, AI can radically improve how we live and work, advancing fields like medicine (e.g., drug discovery), engineering (e.g., smarter infrastructure), and more. Developers see its potential as an assistive technology, complementing human skills rather than replacing them.

    Despite their current limitations, the goal is to refine AI to a point where it consistently enhances efficiency, creativity, and decision-making while reducing errors. In short, while AI doesn’t always work perfectly now, the vision for its future applications drives continued investment and development.

  • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    15 days ago

    Disclaimer: I’m going to ignore all moral questions here

    Because it represents a potentially large leap in the types of problems we can solve with computers. Previously the only comparable tool we had to solve problems were algorithms, which are fast, well-defined, and repeatable, but cannot deal with arbitrary or fuzzy inputs in a meaningful way. AI excels at dealing with fuzzy inputs (including natural language, which was a huge barrier previously), at the expense of speed and reliability. It’s basically an entire missing half to our toolkit.

    Be careful not to conflate AI in general with LLMs. AI is usually implemented as Machine Learning, which is a method of fitting an output to training data. LLMs are a specific instance of this that are trained on language (hence, large language models). I suspect that if AI becomes more widely adopted, most users will be interacting with LLMs like you are now, but most of the business benefit would come from classifiers that have a more restricted input/output space. As an example, you could use ML to train an AI that can be used to detect potentially suspicious bank transactions. The more data you have to sort through, the better AI can learn from it*, so I suspect the companies that have been collecting terabytes of data will start using AI to try to analyze it. I’m curious if that will be effective.

    *technically it depends a lot on the training parameters

    • Kintarian@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      15 days ago

      I suppose it depends on the data you’re using it for. I can see a computer looking through stacks data in no time.

  • xia@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    15 days ago

    The natural general hype is not new… I even see it in 1970’s scifi. It’s like once something pierced the long-thought-impossible turing test, decades of hype pressure suddenly and freely flowed.

    There is also an unnatural hype (that with one breakthrough will come another) and that the next one might yield a technocratic singularity to the first-mover: money, market dominance, and control.

    Which brings the tertiary effect (closer to your question)… companies are so quickly and blindly eating so many billions of dollars of first-mover costs that the corporate copium wants to believe there will be a return (or at least cost defrayal)… so you get a bunch of shitty AI products, and pressure towards them.

      • xia@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        15 days ago

        I’m not talking about one-offs and the assessment noise floor, more like: “ChatGPT broke the Turing test” (as is claimed). It used to be something we tried to attain, and now we don’t even bother trying to make GPT seem human… we actually train them to say otherwise lest people forget. We figuratively pole-vaulted over the turing test and are now on the other side of it, as if it was a point on a timeline instead of an academic procedure.

  • ContrarianTrail@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    15 days ago

    If artificial intelligence doesn’t work why are they trying to make us all use it?

    But it does work. It’s not obviously flawless but it’s orders of magnitude better than it was 10 years ago and it’ll only improve from here. Artificial intelligence is a spectrum. It’s not like we succesfully created it and it ended up sucking. No, it’s like the first cars; they suck compared to what we have now but it’s a huge leap from what we had before.

    I think the main issue here is that the common folk has unrealistic expectations about what AI should be. They’re imagining what the “final product” would be like and then comparing our current systems to that. Ofcourse from that perspective it seems like it’s not working or is no good.

  • Tyrangle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    15 days ago

    This is like saying that automobiles are overhyped because they can’t drive themselves. When I code up a new algorithm at work, I’m spending an hour or two whiteboarding my ideas, then the rest of the day coding it up. AI can’t design the algorithm for me, but if I can describe it in English, it can do the tedious work of writing the code. If you’re just using AI as a Google replacement, you’re missing the bigger picture.

      • Tyrangle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        15 days ago

        A lot of people are doing work that can be automated in part by AI, and there’s a good chance that they’ll lose their jobs in the next few years if they can’t figure out how to incorporate it into their workflow. Some people are indeed out of the workforce or in industries that are safe from AI, but that doesn’t invalidate the hype for the rest of us.

  • LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    14 days ago

    Look at all the comments on this post. We’re not quite there but imagine half of the comments written by Chat GPT and it’s only going to get better.

    Does it matter than 50% of them get it wrong?

    • OpenStars@discuss.online
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      14 days ago

      To advertisers? No.

      To the platform designers? Also no.

      To idiot users? Still no.

      To non-idiot users? Surprisingly no (bc we already left and are here now:-).

      To people wanting Reddit to go the distance and boost their stock values, yes. But only in the long-term, which never exists, and in the short-term, no.

      Hence, enshittification, delivered in a confident tone.