You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
7 points
*

I don’t get the AI hate. It reminds me of the hate for the digital editing tools like Photoshop back 20 years ago.

permalink
report
reply
3 points
*

It uses too much power.

They steal from those that actually create work and don’t pay them for the [sarcasm] privellege [/sarcasm]. People have to eat and as creatives we need to be paid for our work, or those feeding the models data need to create the work themselves which they can’t do because most of them have invested 0 time or effort into actually being creative in that way. Which is why they do this, because most of them have no actual skill and are envious of those who do.

I also, just in general don’t want my conversations to be used to fuel some bot that makes money for someone else. It’s bad for privacy and also, what am I getting out of it? Nothing materially beneficial that I can see and it’ll probably endanger mine or someone else’s life.

Its results are often bad, as in inaccurate or downright dangerous.

It’s just the latest line in a long list of scams designed to give money and power to those on the top of the pile already, see: Cryptocurrency, nfts, loot boxes, microtransactions etc.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

You should read these two articles from Cory Doctorow. I’d like to hear your thoughts.

https://pluralistic.net/2024/05/13/spooky-action-at-a-close-up/#invisible-hand

https://pluralistic.net/2023/02/09/ai-monkeys-paw/

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

When I bring this up, people keep talking about copyright. I’m not really sure why as I don’t explicitly say anything about copyright. I’m personally against copyright, what I’m for is two things:

Creative people, under a system where they need money to live and to continue to create art of all types to get paid and consent.

The first is a very important point because, if you don’t have to pay an actual artist to create things then they won’t get paid and thus won’t be able to live, that’s why Machine Learning is bad under capitalism.

The second is also very important but that tech obsessives and big companies time and time again don’t care enough about. Consent should be sought explicitly before any data is used, time and time again this is not done, so, the next point about consent should be brought up in that consent should be able to be revoked at any point for any reason without consequences for the revoker.

That’s what I care about, not copyright in and of itself, I care about people getting paid at a price they’ve set for every piece of data that’s fed into the machines and explicit revocable consent being given to train the machines, that’s it.

If those two conditions are met then personally then I’d likely have no problem with it.

Edit: Yes, I also agree a lot of the ‘creative industrial complex’ is also bad and should be abolished, a lot of the companies that control the ability for artists to gain access to mass reproduction of their work and mass distribution I am also very much against.

The internet has been somewhat of a levelling space in regards to this. However, such things like spotify etc are also bad as they are owned by the big companies and so pay the artists little and get away with it, which is why I always do my best to pay the artist directly and buy their music, if film and tv shows were stripped of DRM and I could just buy the files directly I’d do that too.

Edit 2: I’m very glad for things like ko-fi and comradery in that they’re trying to be good, non venture capitalist backed funding sources for people and I think that’s wonderful and more artists deserve to get paid on those. I personally think patreon is bad and fewer people should use it because as they’ve shown, since they’re venture capitalist backed, VCs are their real customers, not those using it to get paid.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

So does traveling in an airplane, but we let people do that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I seriously doubt travelling in an airplane does all the listed things.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

What she said plus lots of people don’t fly.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

I’m mostly on your side but I did just cancel my gpt4 subscription.

There’s several factors but the main one is that it just uses a whole lot of power and materials eventhough I don’t really need it.

For example it helped me learn about electronics, and it was effective at that. But I feel it’s more efficient to just buy an ebook. It just feels slightly less convenient, but actually is healthier for my focus.

It’s kinda like with bitcoin. It isn’t a net positive given our current situation. It’s a waste of the scarce resources we have. And we need to get to net 0 ASAP and stop mining like there’s no tomorrow.

The other thing it was good at was searching information and providing it in a uniform format, rather than the mess that is the web rn. But installing Firefox and a bunch of extensions solved most of that. And search engines allow for generating an LLM response when I feel it would really help, so that fills the gap.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points
*

There are multiple reasons:

  • for plenty of use cases where it’s supposed to help, it just plain doesn’t work (software engineering being my main use case, but it does not help find obscure songs/games either).
  • it’s fundamentally unsafe, which matters in a lot of cases where the evangelists want to put AI into.
  • the resource usage to train models is crazy. To the point of delaying Google’s carbon neutrality plans for instance. It’s also expected to put a significant toll on energy grids worldwide for the years to come, which is the last thing we need on a burning planet.
  • it’s being pushed by evil actors like big tech billionaires, who aren’t trusted to do the right things with the tech.
  • it’s already proven harmful (cf Air Canada’s chatbot, or the idiots on today’s other HN LLM subject saying they use it for medical advice or electric work among many examples)
  • it’s overhyped, much like crypto. Way too many promises, and it does not deliver.

My sentiment on the reliability is shared in my team, among people that used it a bit more: it’s a garbage machine.

I do fear it might train a generation of software professionals that don’t know how to code, which is going to harm them (unemployable) or the people they serve, but I might be overreacting due to the fact that the only a person I knew who claimed to use LLMs professionally was a hack who’s using LLMs as a palliative for general lack of skills and low output. Come to think of it, this is precisely the kind of people that should be cautious around LLMs, because they can’t review the LLM’s output accurately for dangerous hallucinations.

I do ask ChatGPT questions sometimes, but honestly pretty rarely. I use it as a complement to regular search, and nothing more, because it can’t get the basics right most of the time.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Hacker News

!hackernews@lemmy.smeargle.fans

Create post

A mirror of Hacker News’ best submissions.

Community stats

  • 762

    Monthly active users

  • 2.5K

    Posts

  • 835

    Comments

Community moderators