• makeshiftreaper@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    AI is untrustworthy and shouldn’t be used

    I have management talking about copilot usage rates and I hear people casually refer to “what ChatGPT told them” in conversation

    • Zak@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      AI is untrustworthy and shouldn’t be used

      I have a more nuanced take. AI is simultaneously untrustworthy and useful. For many queries, DuckDuckGo and Google are performing considerably worse than they used to, while Perplexity usually yields good results. Perplexity also handles complex queries traditional search engines just can’t.

      About a third of the time, Perplexity’s text summary of what it found is inaccurate; it may even say the opposite of what a source does. Reading the sources and evaluating their reliability is no less important than with traditional search, but much of the time I think I wouldn’t have found the same sources that way.

      Of course there are other issues with AI, such as power usage and Perplexity in particular being known for aggressive web scraping.

      Nuance and depth isn’t as popular as I’d like on or off Lemmy.

      • village604@adultswim.fan
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        I’ve found it to be extremely useful for stuff like one-off powershell commands that I’ll use like 3x in my career.

        Just today I was trying to find the command line switches for disk2vhd, and none of the top results, even the official page for the app, had them.

        But Google’s AI had them and provided sources I could use to verify the information.

        But people didn’t do that last part before AI, so I can see why it’s an issue.

        • YeahIgotskills2@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          Absolutely. I recently needed to satisfy auditors with a report on our network security. Our main guy was on leave, but I quickly got the evidence I needed with a few powershell commands that I would have previously spent way more time googling.

          It’s also decent at reports and short, impersonal emails to suppliers etc. It frees up a lot of my time to do actual work, and for that I think it’s decent.

          Like basically everything in life, the truth is between the extremes. For me it’s useful, but doesn’t replace me and my team. I’m neither an AI evangelist or detractor. It’s just another tool.

      • makeshiftreaper@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        Ah, but you see, I never claimed AI isn’t useful. In fact, you can check my comment history. I’ve agreed AI is a very useful tool, I still think it shouldn’t be used for ethical, social, and personal reasons

        A problem with nuance is that people want to discuss the specifics and nuances of what they care about but for the most part won’t do that on subjects for other people. So you need to tailor your responses to your audience. FWIW on Lemmy I see a lot more instances of people with specificly opposed takes where both sides have similar vote counts. So while it’s not perfect it’s better than most

        • village604@adultswim.fan
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          You can theoretically have an ethical LLM. You can train one from the ground up on non-copyrighted materials using renewable energy.

          But I think what a lot of people are forgetting is that it’s not uncommon for technology to start off super inefficient. A computer used to take up an entire floor of an office building, and a hard drive with a few KB of storage used to be the size of a fridge.

          Now you can have a system orders of magnitude more powerful that’s the size of a postage stamp and consumes less than 1W of power.

          • makeshiftreaper@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            Lots of things theoretically exist: a reasonable terms and conditions, a functioning DMV, a unified charging standard, etc. I’m going to focus my energy on things that are real and not hope someone decides to be morally upstanding. If you’re arguing that the bullshit machine that spreads lies that actively harm people could become so ubiquitous that it fits in any electronic device if we just keep giving it money, then I’d say you’re making my argument for me

    • GalacticTaterTot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      I think it is useful with a constrained dataset. Like using it to summarize things about a dataset, or dumping documents into it and asked getting info about it (like Gemini in Google Drive).

      It is not useful for general question using the whole-ass internet as a dataset.

      Also I wish it was called something other than AI…it’s just a word guesser FFS.

    • psx_crab@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      I have people telling me how to do my work because “That’s what ChatGPT suggested, and they’re always accurate”.

      🤷

    • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      As a software developer I fully agree. People bash on it constantly here but the fact is is that it’s required for our jobs now. I just made it through a job hunt and every tech screen I did they not only insisted on me using AI, but they figured how much I was using too.

      The fact is is that like it or not it does speed us up, and it is a tool in our toolbelt. You don’t have to trust it 100% or blindly accept what it does, but you do need to be able to use it. Refusing to use it is like refusing to use the designer for WinForms 20 years ago, or refusing to use an IDE at work. You’re going to be at a massive disadvantage to your competing jobseekers who are more than happy to use AI.

      • acchariya@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        29 days ago

        I review take home assignments and mostly we receive AI submissions. It’s easy to tell when they aren’t AI though because we get thoughtful comments about why one choice was made over another, and comments on the higher level view that only come from product context and experience. I don’t think one single fully ai-created submission has made it passed the code review part.

    • burntbacon@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 month ago

      The propaganda is so strong with this one. If you talk to someone who owns just about anything, they somehow imagine you’re coming after them and their stuff if you even mention anything like taxing the rich, much less getting rid of people who own more than some entire counties.

      • CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        They just worked harder than the rest of us and had good ideas at the right time.

        Erm, no, that still doesn’t make their labour worth thousands of times more than the next person.

        People I talk to know millionaire workaholics and think that but for some timing that person would be a billionaire because they don’t understand how orders of magnitude work. 100k in the bank vs 1 million is a much smaller barrier than 1 million vs 1 billion never mind 100 billion

      • shalafi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        The whole 1% slogan was fucking stupid. We all know decent people in the 1%. It’s the .001% that are the problem.

        • TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          30 days ago

          most of the 1% I have known are not decent at all. they are just good at playing the victim and passing the buck to someone else wealthier than them.

      • AmidFuror@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        I don’t think people would stop at billionaires. They’d keep going until it got uncomfortably close to their own level of wealth, but the people worse off than them wouldn’t stop there, either.

        • Bluetreefrog@lemmy.worldM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          Provided we are talking about taxation not guillotines, it’s that really a problem? In Norway, a doctor doesn’t earn much more than a train ticket seller.

          “Why study medicine”, you ask? “Self actualisation.” Is their answer. Remember, University is free in that system, so no student debt.

    • Iced Raktajino@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      [Giancarlo Esposito Meme]

      I think billionaires shouldn’t exist because we should have appropriate levels of taxation and a “maximum wage” law.

      Lemmy thinks billionaires shouldn’t exist and are setting up guillotines.

      We are not the same.

      • njm1314@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 month ago

        You are the same it’s just that yours only comes after theirs. You can’t get to yours until you do theirs first.

    • This is popular. Just look at the celebrations when bin laden got killed. Or how people celebrate executions of heionous criminals. Sure, they say they don’t like “murder”, but they think like: “he should get the death penalty”, which is practically the same thought, but worded in a more… “legal” phrasing.

      I mean maybe not “majority”, but there’s a lot of people that are okay with death penalty. Even the liberals opposing death penalty sometimes think that a mass shooter should get executed, like that white supremacist dude that murdered black people in a church (not gonna name the shithead), biden was doing pardons when he was leaving office and that guy was one of the ones that he did not commute the death sentence of. So he basically implied that he approved of the racist murder getting executed. A president of the US implicitly approved of a killing (a good decision, btw), I mean… that’s as mainstream as it can get.

      Death to the Charleston Church shooter. Lolol (To mods: this is not “violence” since dude is on death row, I’m just wishing for it to be faster LOL)

      TLDR: “Murder” bad, “Executions” okay, is basically the sentinment of some people.

    • Sunsofold@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 month ago

      That seems pretty popular out in the world as well, just usually with slightly different selections of ‘sometimes.’

      • Jerkface (any/all)@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        The people I associate with in real life and get exposed to via media are all very much of the opinion that murder is bad.

  • Dr. Bob@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    I still have no idea what a Tankie is. As far as I can tell it only exists here on Lemmy and I might be one.

    • thethunderwolf@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 month ago

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tankie

      Tankie is a pejorative label generally applied to authoritarian communists, especially those who support or defend acts of repression by such regimes, their allies, or deny the occurrence of the events thereof. More specifically, the term has been applied to those who express support for one-party Marxist–Leninist socialist republics, whether contemporary or historical. It is commonly used by anti-authoritarian leftists, anarchists, libertarian socialists, left communists, social democrats, democratic socialists, and reformists to criticise Leninism, although the term has seen increasing use by liberal and right‐wing factions as well.[5][4]

    • Blisterexe@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 month ago

      As an example, I recently had someone unironically claim that china has more free speech than france, from a server hosted in france 🤦

    • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      29 days ago

      The term came into use for communists who supported the Soviet Union sending in tanks to crush the Hungarian Revolution in 1956, with the commentary being that tankies supported Soviet imperialism over local revolution.

      So supporting Palestine over Israel doesn’t make someone a tankie, but supporting Russia over Ukraine does.

    • greenbit@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      30 days ago

      It’s just a variety of fascist, pretending to belong with ideologies and principles that are not compatible

      • neidu3@sh.itjust.worksM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        By skimming the front page I don’t see many tankie-traits. Loads of communism and socialism, sure, but not much tankie stuff. But I’m sure there’s a lot of them in the comments with “interesting” takes on the cultural revolution and the holodomor.

        • chunes@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          You’re right. It seems to be mostly anarchists and such. There might have been more tankies back in the day, or maybe I just misremembered.

        • grte@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          In practice, liberals and anarchists call anyone who defines themselves as a communist a tankie. Liberals will frequently use it for anyone who claims to be any sort of socialist.

          • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            Maybe sometimes. I don’t think this is generally true. Though I’ve also met tankies who think you’re not a real communist unless you’re a tankie. Are you one of those people?

            To me you’re not a tankie unless you consistently apologize for, minimize, or dismiss oppression under so-called socialist countries. There are a decent number of communists who don’t do this but they’re not the majority from what I’ve seen.

          • Coyote_sly@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            I don’t know why you’re getting downvoted for this. I’ve SEEN real tankies, doing odd things like cheering for BRICS to rise up or Russia to defeat NATO in Ukraine because late stage capitalist oligarchy counts as communism if it’s Russian or something, I don’t know?

            But the VAST majority of the time I see it used is by neoliberals as an excuse to dismiss literally anyone anywhere on the actual political left out of hand.

  • Flax@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    30 days ago

    That it’s okay to kill people who disagree with you