Calculators also don’t uphold fascist agendas or drain entire cities’ worth of energy and water just to hallucinate wrong answers in the name of “convenience”
Do you have research to support your claim that AI in general upholds fascist ideologies (aside from those specifically tuned to do so, like Grok)? I don’t condone the current model of data center driven AI, but there is such a thing as self hosted LLMs. Some Linux distro even have them available out of the box.
You included all the proof we need in your comment. Grok has been proven to do it, others may be doing it as well. And if its isn’t promoting fascism maybe its promoting some other ideology. The point is these models are not unbiased, and in many cases are being manipulated by their owners.
It’s not maybe they have been researched and are highly manipulable.
You are trusting the host of the model to not introduce biases. Getting the model to regurgitate it’s hard coded prompt info has already happened and different providers have been doing that
People who use LLMs are just obnoxious to be around. They’re genuinely unpleasant people to interact with. Imagine casually asking someone’s opinion or thoughts on a topic, and they pull out a phone and ask the llm. I didn’t ask the robot. I asked you. And the same applies to written communication. People addicted to LLMs are just mouth pieces for a soulless machine, fools who have sold their souls and become nothing more than robots themselves.
I think you may be concentrating on a very small percentage of users, and using that false impression and your own bias to pass broad faulty judgements.
I use AI but I’ve never even thought of doing the behavior you speak of.
Well me. I’m that loser. People addicted to LLMs and their affirmative chatbot nonsense to guide their life and professional choices have proven to be poor colleagues and poorer mates. But I guess I’m the loser.
Nah, my idiot brother uses llms for everything in his legal practice. He has yet to get in trouble for hallucinated citations, but it’s merely a matter of time
He just got dumped by wife 4 and is looking for wife 5. Make of that what you will
Checking your work with a calculator is just making sure you pressed the buttons correctly, possibly running through the process a second time if it’s important enough.
“Checking your work” with an llm is literally just doing the thing you should have done initially when you wanted the answer you were looking for. Involving the llm at all is a totally nonsensical waste of time
It gives you a good starting point. If its something simple, like “What are the best night clubs in my area”, then it is useful. It may not be 100% accurate in that case, but you were going to go through them 1 by 1 anyway, and it can give you a quick summary of what they are, so you can decide if you want to look into them more. Or you can further narrow down your results in a way that a simple google search couldn’t. I’m not saying its the be all end all, but this whole “AI is totally useless” thing is just ridiculous.
I would actually take it a step further and say it’s worse than useless tbh.
What good is it to have a summary generated about night clubs when literally zero of the details generated can be presumed accurate? Like it will just full on ass pull basic details even down to the hours of operation. This constant confident misinfo actually harms your process.
you were going to go through them 1 by 1 anyway
And furthermore, we’re ignoring the fact that no, you were not. Nobody in the history of time has ever run a detailed comparative analysis on a massive list of nightclubs in their area for the purpose of optimizing their night out. You just look at the map for whatever’s gonna be cheapest to uber to and quickly check the reviews lol. Or more likely someone in your group started out wanting to check out a specific place, and that’s that.
The mere concept of employing AI in this instance was delivered to you by a marketing firm. That’s the bread and butter of these companies: pretending a trivial, routine task that we’ve performed without friction for many years is actually a large project that justifies investment in and deployment of their bloated expensive product.
You can go back and forth with me all day trying to contrive different random examples where you think maaaaaybe the AI saves you ten seconds of time if you squint, but in reality people who often use it just waste a bunch of their time floundering and walk away less informed than when they started
So you just basically admit that no amount of argument against your point will change your mind. So thanks for letting me know I’m wasting my time here. Have a good one.
Nice attempt at a copout. Where did I admit anything similar to that?
My mind can very easily be changed with evidence. The problem with “AI” is all you have is marketing without substance.
The fact that users are wasting their time and ending up confidently ill informed is why I consider it worse than worthless. Literally every study indicates that people are less efficient when they adopt the tech (even the people who incorrectly self report that their numbers are better lmao). Companies across the board are failing to get ROI on this. The results speak.
So yes, I am unfortunately not interested in wasting all day on an endless string of improvised hypothetical situations written from the perspective of LLMs being great and then working backwards from there. It’s fruitless and irrational
It just regurgitates, with a level of randomness, the existing user reviews you would have gotten on a search result. Plus AI leaves a ton of opportunity to obscure advertising by influencing the summary output to favor certain locations in a way that is less obvious than ads and search result ordering.
Yeah, it is great at getting an answer that looks plausible as long as you don’t care about accuracy. At that point just do a web search for nearby clubs and pick one randomly, the end result is the same except the latter isn’t driving up costs and increasing pollution for everyone else nearly as much as AI.
I actually find the opposite is true. I don’t mean it’s bad but you get much better results with some basic starting point.
For example at my last company we had a database which for a VERY small example had a table with device serial, test type, test result(pass/fail), and an ID to another table. For each test in the other table there was a series of rows with that id which had all the details of test. For example unit 123 might be circuit board with 5 test points testing voltages at various points, all tested at one test station.
So you would go into table 1, select all lines with serial 123 and test type “electrical test”, copy the test ID, go into table 2 and select all results for that ID.
One day my boss sent me a list of 500 serials and told me to pull all the details and present it in a table.
Doing that manually would be hours. So people with some sql knowledge might recognize you could use a sub query. Problem being the list sent to me was just a table copied and sent over teams. Would probably take atleast half an hour to copy that into ssms and correct all the formatting to be valid sql.
I wrote a script that pulled the details for 1 serial using a sub query and pivot the results , copied that and the list of serials into chatgpt and asked it to modify the query to include all the serials in the table in correct sql format. It worked great( I got results for 500 unique serials and a test of a random 10 of them got the same results). It took maybe 5 minutes.
Now trying to get chatgpt to do that from scratch would be painful but with some idea of structure of data, an idea of what I wanted to do and an example to follow it worked wonderfully.
“Why I refuse to date someone who uses a calculator”. This is basically what this article equates to.
A calculator gives the same, right answer every time, though
Calculators also don’t uphold fascist agendas or drain entire cities’ worth of energy and water just to hallucinate wrong answers in the name of “convenience”
Do you have research to support your claim that AI in general upholds fascist ideologies (aside from those specifically tuned to do so, like Grok)? I don’t condone the current model of data center driven AI, but there is such a thing as self hosted LLMs. Some Linux distro even have them available out of the box.
You included all the proof we need in your comment. Grok has been proven to do it, others may be doing it as well. And if its isn’t promoting fascism maybe its promoting some other ideology. The point is these models are not unbiased, and in many cases are being manipulated by their owners.
It’s not maybe they have been researched and are highly manipulable.
You are trusting the host of the model to not introduce biases. Getting the model to regurgitate it’s hard coded prompt info has already happened and different providers have been doing that
I don’t think the premise of the article is related to how correct or incorrect LLM answers are.
Sure, but what kind of loser chooses his friends based on if they use one or not.
People who use LLMs are just obnoxious to be around. They’re genuinely unpleasant people to interact with. Imagine casually asking someone’s opinion or thoughts on a topic, and they pull out a phone and ask the llm. I didn’t ask the robot. I asked you. And the same applies to written communication. People addicted to LLMs are just mouth pieces for a soulless machine, fools who have sold their souls and become nothing more than robots themselves.
And no, I don’t date clankers.
I think you may be concentrating on a very small percentage of users, and using that false impression and your own bias to pass broad faulty judgements.
I use AI but I’ve never even thought of doing the behavior you speak of.
Well me. I’m that loser. People addicted to LLMs and their affirmative chatbot nonsense to guide their life and professional choices have proven to be poor colleagues and poorer mates. But I guess I’m the loser.
I doubt there’s much proof outside your own bias.
Nah, my idiot brother uses llms for everything in his legal practice. He has yet to get in trouble for hallucinated citations, but it’s merely a matter of time
He just got dumped by wife 4 and is looking for wife 5. Make of that what you will
Unless you hit the wrong key or do the problem wrong. That’s why you should always check your work, even when using a calculator. Same with AI.
Checking your work with a calculator is just making sure you pressed the buttons correctly, possibly running through the process a second time if it’s important enough.
“Checking your work” with an llm is literally just doing the thing you should have done initially when you wanted the answer you were looking for. Involving the llm at all is a totally nonsensical waste of time
It gives you a good starting point. If its something simple, like “What are the best night clubs in my area”, then it is useful. It may not be 100% accurate in that case, but you were going to go through them 1 by 1 anyway, and it can give you a quick summary of what they are, so you can decide if you want to look into them more. Or you can further narrow down your results in a way that a simple google search couldn’t. I’m not saying its the be all end all, but this whole “AI is totally useless” thing is just ridiculous.
Goggle AI says
I would actually take it a step further and say it’s worse than useless tbh.
What good is it to have a summary generated about night clubs when literally zero of the details generated can be presumed accurate? Like it will just full on ass pull basic details even down to the hours of operation. This constant confident misinfo actually harms your process.
And furthermore, we’re ignoring the fact that no, you were not. Nobody in the history of time has ever run a detailed comparative analysis on a massive list of nightclubs in their area for the purpose of optimizing their night out. You just look at the map for whatever’s gonna be cheapest to uber to and quickly check the reviews lol. Or more likely someone in your group started out wanting to check out a specific place, and that’s that.
The mere concept of employing AI in this instance was delivered to you by a marketing firm. That’s the bread and butter of these companies: pretending a trivial, routine task that we’ve performed without friction for many years is actually a large project that justifies investment in and deployment of their bloated expensive product.
You can go back and forth with me all day trying to contrive different random examples where you think maaaaaybe the AI saves you ten seconds of time if you squint, but in reality people who often use it just waste a bunch of their time floundering and walk away less informed than when they started
So you just basically admit that no amount of argument against your point will change your mind. So thanks for letting me know I’m wasting my time here. Have a good one.
You’re in a group that’s literally called “Fuck AI”.
Yes, you’re wasting your time here if you’re pitching AI. Go find a group that doesn’t have “Fuck” immediately preceding “AI”.
Nice attempt at a copout. Where did I admit anything similar to that?
My mind can very easily be changed with evidence. The problem with “AI” is all you have is marketing without substance.
The fact that users are wasting their time and ending up confidently ill informed is why I consider it worse than worthless. Literally every study indicates that people are less efficient when they adopt the tech (even the people who incorrectly self report that their numbers are better lmao). Companies across the board are failing to get ROI on this. The results speak.
So yes, I am unfortunately not interested in wasting all day on an endless string of improvised hypothetical situations written from the perspective of LLMs being great and then working backwards from there. It’s fruitless and irrational
How does the AI know the “best night clubs”?
It just regurgitates, with a level of randomness, the existing user reviews you would have gotten on a search result. Plus AI leaves a ton of opportunity to obscure advertising by influencing the summary output to favor certain locations in a way that is less obvious than ads and search result ordering.
Yeah, it is great at getting an answer that looks plausible as long as you don’t care about accuracy. At that point just do a web search for nearby clubs and pick one randomly, the end result is the same except the latter isn’t driving up costs and increasing pollution for everyone else nearly as much as AI.
I actually find the opposite is true. I don’t mean it’s bad but you get much better results with some basic starting point.
For example at my last company we had a database which for a VERY small example had a table with device serial, test type, test result(pass/fail), and an ID to another table. For each test in the other table there was a series of rows with that id which had all the details of test. For example unit 123 might be circuit board with 5 test points testing voltages at various points, all tested at one test station.
So you would go into table 1, select all lines with serial 123 and test type “electrical test”, copy the test ID, go into table 2 and select all results for that ID.
One day my boss sent me a list of 500 serials and told me to pull all the details and present it in a table.
Doing that manually would be hours. So people with some sql knowledge might recognize you could use a sub query. Problem being the list sent to me was just a table copied and sent over teams. Would probably take atleast half an hour to copy that into ssms and correct all the formatting to be valid sql.
I wrote a script that pulled the details for 1 serial using a sub query and pivot the results , copied that and the list of serials into chatgpt and asked it to modify the query to include all the serials in the table in correct sql format. It worked great( I got results for 500 unique serials and a test of a random 10 of them got the same results). It took maybe 5 minutes.
Now trying to get chatgpt to do that from scratch would be painful but with some idea of structure of data, an idea of what I wanted to do and an example to follow it worked wonderfully.
If someone uses a calculator to add 3 plus 7 together, I wouldn’t want to date them. I do have some standards.
Sometimes I need a math receipt. That’s what the calculator (with the paper feed) is for.
Amount of test points i lost over the years from the simple stuff while focusing on the hard stuff taught me to never underestimate what’s simple.