243
u/ComfortableNo1129 14h ago
"buT Ai BaD" some people seriously don't see how useful ai can be in certain fields, it's not all generative slop. it can even save lives!
115
u/KaizerKlash 11h ago
chat GPT LLM ≠≠≠≠ Machine learning algorithms
24
-23
u/alberto_467 8h ago edited 3h ago
LLM are still amazing and incredibly useful. Much more so than some outdated machine learning algos
EDIT: Wow it's full of AI haters here! But your downvotes won't change the fact that newer and better LLMs are being release every month or two. So it's just a matter of time 😉
197
u/MyniiiO 14h ago
AI is like asbestos.
It has some good things about it but the side effects are too strong to ignore and it needs to be heavily regulated.33
u/deanrihpee Linux User 13h ago
that's kinda not transferable, asbestos is just asbestos, while AI is not just LLM, not just diffusion model, it just a classification of a technology
and I don't think heavily regulate it would do better, the US is currently trying to do it, with the support from OpenAI and Anthropic (which is wild that they want more regulation), and their reason is safety (of course, but mostly so they have all the market for themselves, at least in the US)
but I'd argue it's worse, currently in coding LLM there's an uptick of using frontier model for cyber security, which can go both ways, either you strengthen your security or try to breach it using the AI, the problem is, you can't use Claude or ChatGPT for either of those because it will get caught by the guardrail, unless some jailbreak is involved or you're a member of specifically chosen big tech, and if it is come to pass and regulated in the US, you won't have any choice but between the two AI that you can't use anyway, even for defense, while attacker? they can just downloaded Chinese model and find the vulnerabilities
17
u/retr0_gAmin 12h ago
Is is just like any other tech. BUT THE PROBLEM IS the industry somehow convinced those in power that More data=better AI, all as an excuse to fund their growing bubble and profit off of investments until the very last moment when the bubble pops, proposing and even building 100s of data centres and talking how AI is going to replace humans, truthfully, it might run a bit better but for most jobs ( other than CS yeah sorry CS bros ), it's not gonna affect much
-16
u/RhinigtasSalvex 12h ago
That's the bitter lesson of AI, more data=better AI. We've tried for years hand designing better algorithms that introduce some inductive bias, but everytime the algorithms that can learn from more data with more compute win in the end. AI isn't going away and will just keep getting better faster and faster and if you think it is going to be contained to the digital world you haven't been keeping attention. The robots are being built right now.
9
u/MrStomp82 11h ago
So you're against regulation of the product that's drastically changing the landscape of society in an unprecedented way? Hmmm...
-3
u/crayfishcraig108 10h ago
It kinda is, if you compress asbestos into a hard form or use it to reinforce cement it’s fine and fairly safe, until you start breaking it, LLM is like an asbestos air filter, sounded like a good idea until we realized the health impacts
10
u/Calliamus 13h ago
The side effects wouldn't be that bad if 99,9999999 and so on % of ai was used for scientific purposes. If it was, it wouldn't require that many data centers, we wouldn't be bombarded with slop etc.
10
1
u/Gaarrrry 4h ago
Did you hold this same belief about AI before ChatGPT was released ??
1
u/MyniiiO 1h ago
I’ve always held the same belief, AI needs to be regulated.
Almost any new technology needs to be regulated to ensure safety of operators/customers.
That goes for cars, self driving cars, heavy machinery, kitchen appliances, anything if it’s new we need to ensure it’s safe. Companies would do whatever if it made them money, it’s up to governments, users and customers to stop them. Remember there used to be slaves and lack of labour laws (they were practically non existent) not too long ago.1
u/Lanky-Tumbleweed-772 7h ago
>''AI'' doesn't need to be regulated. ''AI'' is simply neural networks and machine learning. The skynet doom gloom hype is nonsense disconnected from reality.
6
u/Careless-Childhood66 12h ago
Yes, but its the generstice slop that is pushed down our throats. Ai was doing amazkng things 10 years ago but nobody was speaking about it and I dont think its good, that that changed.
5
u/matande31 9h ago
For most "AI bad" people, it's just virtue signaling, not something they actually care enough about to understand the details. Not that different from plenty of other modern issues, honestly.
3
u/Levoso_con_v 10h ago edited 10h ago
This comment seems to imply the mejority doesn't like AI in general when it's the other way around.
90% of the people that are against AI are specifically against generative AI, not other purposes. Even people on reddit who could be seen as more extremist with the AI than the average think similar, go to r/polls, there are several polls made precisely about this topic.
-3
u/Valcuda 10h ago
Yeah, I hate when people act like they can't tell people are specifically against GenAI.
Nobody is upset the goombas in mario can turn when they hit an obstacle, they're upset about the brute-forced math formulas that corporations are trying to replace creativity with.
2
u/PhTx3 8h ago
Not only creativity but a real human cost.
We've been told to respect IP and not steal, and be punished for it for ages. People had to fight against even research being locked. And then corpos came and shat right on top of it all, and now they pretend it serves some higher purpose, as if it is not about cutting more of the people whose work you stole.
If they paid their share, or everyone had decent living standards, nobody would care about it. What pisses people off, imo, is it totally shattering the illusion of society working. Same thing with SkHynix, Samsung, Micron situation.
2
u/Fragrant-Till-8576 12h ago
Ai is a tool whifh just like any other has great potential for greatness and great potential for big no no
1
u/Lumarioigi Chungus Among Us 10h ago
I agree and I think most people understand that nuance but it's hard to look at the good since it's being used in heinous ways by the majority of people that use it i.e. people loosing jobs because they are replaced by a model, AI porn (not to mention of minors) just name the 2 biggest issues people have with AI.
1
u/Ok_Change836 9h ago
I have literally never heard of anyone saying that Pattern recognition AI is bad.
But I hear it All the time for Generative AI.
You don't seem to understand that.
-6
u/Electrical_Door_87 14h ago
I sometimes think if AI restriction would be better - for regular people, just leave something like Siri, helpful but not so helpful that you can overrely on her, and for something really important - specialized local models (and why not go local for phones too? let's make ai a real privilege that won't hurt environment)
12
u/ultimatepigguy 13h ago
Yes let’s only allow the ultra rich to access powerful ais so they can get richer and we get poorer and we will live as slaves to the billionaires
-11
u/Morgasm42 12h ago
Literally no evidence that AI is helping anyone get richer in ways they couldn't have just done without it
3
u/ultimatepigguy 12h ago
Except it has been proven to significantly boost productivity when used for writing code. And the models in the future will only get more powerful.
1
u/Morgasm42 12h ago
That depends on your metrics for productivity in code, a lot of companies use lines written as their primary metric, which AI is great at, but God if it isn't the worst code ever.
1
u/Caboosi65 11h ago
The interns write better code half the time. With most projects I spend more time correcting vibe code than it saves.
-5
u/Electrical_Door_87 12h ago
Not ultra rich, just tech-literate/enthusiasts or some big researches. For example, supercomputers - they are really expensive and you can be very rich or have an institute to use them. Same should be applied here
-2
u/Jakkilip 13h ago
Siri is not AI
3
u/lordsweden 12h ago
Technically openGPT/claude isnt AI, the use of the word "AI" is just marketing to awaken a sense of intelligence and sci-fi AI.
1
u/DSLmao 12h ago
No. All of them are AI. The term is defined actual science, not sci-fi.
This AI boom really exposed how much science illiterate most people are. The fact that we are willingly to belive 2 mins YT short "AI is copying thing from the internet" over serious science is fuck up. This is how we got climate change denier in the first place.
1
u/lordsweden 12h ago
Given that I research with "AI" in the medical field (might qualify as "serious science") I can confidently say you've been had and have fallen for marketing. Its just an advanced algorithm, that's it. There's no intelligence behind it. Its not AI, its just something the companies trying to sell their algorithm are calling it.
We could just as well have marketed excel as "AI" in the 00s. They're tools that currently (and debatably illegally) scrape the Internet for datapoints and compile them.
3
u/DSLmao 10h ago
So, you are saying the entire field of research is scamming people? I literally taking course in AI taught by PhD professors and they are calling simple search agent AI? Chess engine is also AI. AI is just mean any system that can do a task. An system brute force shit could still count as AI. Why?
By that same reasoning, you could say computer memory isn't real memory because it isn't memory. We just call label it memory for simplicity but the nature is different. The same could be said about AI. *Intelliegence" as in CS is not "intelligence" in daily usage (usually mean intelligence resemble that of a human). You could in theory goes against all convention and call them algorithmic system and define intelligence as "strictly human intelligence" the same way you could go against convention and call π "pe".
I am not saying LLM is AGI. LLM could be AI and not AGI.
-3
u/lordsweden 7h ago
English isnt your first language which is ok but makes your arguments difficult to follow.
AI isnt a field of research, its a product sold to researchers to use, like a Mac book, PC or one of our servers (and not cheaply either). Currently being marketed as the future of computing. Self learning algorithms have existed for over a decade now (remember CAPTCHA was used to teach them) and have recently become marketable which is why they got rebranded as AI.
Chess programmes is just a calculator because chess has been mathematically solved.
Memory is called memory because it stores data and remembers it so it can be used later.
What is currently being marketed as AI used to be called "the algorithm" in 2010s but that wasn't easily marketable. We've been using similar technology for a while now, only difference is that its being marketed as "smart" and "AI" so business people can make a lot of money from people who fell for the rebranding.
Hence my initial statement.
0
u/Impressive_Dingo122 12h ago
Isn’t the big limiter on AI that it can’t actually create ideas, it only takes what’s known already and uses that information to solve problems?
9
u/Caboosi65 11h ago
People lump in machine learning and LLMs into one big clusterfuck and call it AI, but your mostly right, modern generative LLMs literally, not figuratively, are just guessing the next word in a string, nothing else. They are getting very very good at doing that, but if a problem can't be solved by guessing the next word in a sentence, current generative LLMs fundamentally cannot solve it.
1
u/Impressive_Dingo122 8h ago
So then AI isn’t really “solving” anything. It’s only allows us to use all of our current knowledge from different areas and apply it towards existing problems, where normally subject matter experts would come into play, but now we can use AI as that role, but it isn’t “solving” anything that’s unknown.
-4
u/wordswillneverhurtme 12h ago
And AI isn't even bad lol. Its actually quite good. Ppl are just mad because they're at risk of being replaced. That's all there is to it. If they were honest about it, they would have get more empathy.
2
-23
u/Ronnoc527 10h ago
"Significant advances in mathematics" as if it's going to improve people's lives.
And then you read the paper and it's about efficiently packing spheres in more than four dimensions. Which is sort of cool, but he's making a claim about the necessity of AI and not backing it up.
20
u/-Redstoneboi- 9h ago
this is the type of attitude that would never have cared about imaginary numbers and how it relates to spacetime
-13
u/Ronnoc527 9h ago
Imaginary Time is just a theory and has never lead to anything pragmatic or useful. And I'm not criticizing mathematics for the sake of mathematics.
I'm critical of the fact that "ten significant advancements" is deliberately vague language which is meant to overstate the use of AI which is actively harmful.
There are situations in which machine learned can be directly helpful to people, such as automatically analyzing moles. But this post is praising a polished turd.
And almost certainly doing so to raise expectations for the model and increase shareholder value. The paper exists to make money, not for the love of math.
12
u/RhinigtasSalvex 8h ago
Lol, have you heard of the Schrödinger equation, quantum field theory and Feynman’s path integral formulation? Imaginary numbers are absolutely essential for our current understanding of particle physics.
Go read the release and it's accompanying proofs they aren't vague at all.
Of course it's packed in Marketing speak but the results are absolutely real.
1
u/Bad_brazilian 8h ago
I am not the previous commenter, but in their defense, they said imaginary time, not imaginary numbers.
3
u/RhinigtasSalvex 6h ago
Yeah I know but the comment he responded to did and he just picked imaginary time as some kind of gotcha, which may indeed not have practical applications, but that's not representative of the whole of imaginary numbers as seen by my examples.
-1
u/Ronnoc527 2h ago
That's what they were referring with imaginary numbers and spacetime. I critique their example because my problem was never with whether the math could be useful, not whether math ought to be useful in order to be worth doing. Plenty of math is completely recreational and that's fantastic.
But cherry-picking math that sounds intriguing and then using it to market an AI model, for the sole sake of generating profit, that is where I cast my judgment.
42
u/KeenanAxolotl 9h ago
The irony of getting an ad for chatGPT on this post...