Ask Lemmy

Stop selling it a loss.

When each ugly picture costs $1.75, and every needless summary or expansion costs 59 cents, nobody's going to want it.

People have negative sentiments towards AI under a captalist system, where the most successful is equal to most profitable and that does not translate into the most useful for humanity

We have technology to feed everyone and yet we don't We have technology to house everyone and yet we don't We have technology to teach everyone and yet we don't

Captalist democracy is not real democracy

Shutting these "AI"s down. The once out for the public dont help anyone. They do more damage then they are worth.

Gen AI should be an optional tool to help us improve our work and life, not an unavoidable subscription service that makes it all worse and makes us dumber in the process.

I’m not anti AI, but I wish the people who are would describe what they are upset about a bit more eloquently, and decipherable. The environmental impact I completely agree with. Making every google search run a half cooked beta LLM isn’t the best use of the worlds resources. But every time someone gets on their soapbox in the comments it’s like they don’t even know the first thing about the math behind it. Like just figure out what you’re mad about before you start an argument. It comes across as childish to me

Ruin the marketing. I want them to stop using the key term AI and use the appropriate terminology narrow minded AI. It needs input so let's stop making up fantasy's about AI it's bullshit in truth.

Reduce global resource consumption with the goal of eliminating fossil fuel use. Burning nat gas to make fake pictures that everyone hates is just the worst.

(Ignoring all the stolen work to train the models for a minute)

It's got its uses and potential, things like translations, writing prompts, or a research tool.

But all the products that force it in places that clearly do not need it and solving problems could be solved by two or three steps of logic.

The failed attempts at replacing jobs, screen resumes or monitoring employees is terrible.

Lastly the AI relationships are not good.

If we're talking realm of pure fantasy: destroy it.

I want you to understand this is not AI sentiment as a whole, I understand why the idea is appealing, how it could be useful, and in some ways may seem inevitable.

But a lot of sci-fi doesn't really address the run up to AI, in fact a lot of it just kind of assumes there'll be an awakening one day. What we have right now is an unholy, squawking abomination that has been marketed to nefarious ends and never should have been trusted as far as it has. Think real hard about how corporations are pushing the development and not academia.

Put it out of its misery.

I generally pro AI but agree with the argument that having big tech hoard this technology is the real problem.

The solution is easy and right there in front of everyone's eyes. Force open source on everything. All datasets, models, model weights and so on have to be fully transparent. Maybe as far as hardware firmware should be open source.

This will literally solve every single problem people have other than energy use which is a fake problem to begin with.

The most popular models used online need to include citations for everything. It can be used to automate some white collar/knowledge work but needs to be scrutinized heavily by independent thinkers when using it to try to predict trend and future events.

As always schools need to be better at teaching critical thinking, epistemology, emotional intelligence way earlier than we currently do and AI shows that rote subject matter is a dated way to learn.

When artists create art, there should be some standardized seal, signature, or verification that the artist did not use AI or used it only supplementally on the side. This would work on the honor system and just constitute a scandal if the artist is eventually outed as having faked their craft. (Think finding out the handmade furniture you bought was actually made in a Vietnamese factory. The seller should merely have their reputation tarnished.)

Overall I see AI as the next step in search engine synthesis, info just needs to be properly credited to the original researchers and verified against other sources by the user. No different than Google or Wikipedia.

I want all of the CEOs and executives that are forcing shitty AI into everything to get pancreatic cancer and die painfully in a short period of time.

Then I want all AI that is offered commercially or in commercial products to be required to verify their training data and be severely punished for misusing private and personal data. Copyright violations need to be punished severely, and using copyrighted works being used for AI training counts.

AI needs to be limited to optional products trained with properly sourced data if it is going to be used commercially. Individual implementations and use for science is perfectly fine as long as the source data is either in the public domain or from an ethically collected data set.

I think the AI that helps us find/diagnose/treat diseases is great, and the model should be open to all in the medical field (open to everyone I feel would be easily abused by scammers and cause a lot of unnecessary harm - essentially if you can't validate what it finds you shouldn't be using it).

I'm not a fan of these next gen IRC chat bots that have companies hammering sites all over the web to siphon up data it shouldn't be allowed to. And then pushing these boys into EVERYTHING! And like I saw a few mention, if their bots have been trained on unauthorized data sets they should be forced to open source their models for the good of the people (since that is the BS reason openai has been bending and breaking the rules).

I’d like for it to be forgotten, because it’s not AI.

Energy consumption limit. Every AI product has a consumption limit of X GJ. After that, the server just shuts off.

The limit should be high enough to not discourage research that would make generative AI more energy efficient, but it should be low enough that commercial users would be paying a heavy price for their waste of energy usage.

Additionally, data usage consent for generative AI should be opt-in. Not opt-out.

I want the companies that run LLMs to be forced to pay for the copyrighted training data they stole to train their auto complete bots.

I want us to keep chipping away at actually creating REAL ARTIFICAL INTELLIGENCE, that can reason, understand self, and function autonomously, like living things. Marketing teams are calling everything AI but none of it is actually intelligent, it's just ok at sounding intelligent.

I want people to stop gaslighting themselves into thinking this autocomplete web searching bot is comparable to a human in any way. The difference between ChatGPT and Google's search congregation ML algorithm was the LLM on it that makes it sound like a person. But it only sounds like a person, it's nowhere close, but we have people falling in love and worshipping chat bots like gods.

Also the insane energy consumption makes it totally unsustainable.

TL;DR- AI needs to be actually intelligent, not marketing teams gaslighting us. People need to be taught that these things are nowhere close to human and won't be for a very long time despite it parroting human speech. And they are rapidly destroying the planet.

We're making the same mistake with AI as we did with cars; not planning human future.

Cars were designed to atrophy muscles, and polluted urban planning and the air.
AI is being designed to atrophy brains, and pollutes the air, the internet, public discourse, and more to come.

We should change course towards AI that makes people smarter, not dumber: AI-aided collaborative thinking.
https://www.quora.com/Why-is-it-better-to-work-on-intelligence-augmentation-rather-than-artificial-intelligence/answer/Harri-K-Hiltunen

More regulation, supervised development, laws limiting training data to be consensual.

My fantasy is for "everyone" to realize there's absolutely nothing "intelligent" about current AI. There is no rationalization. It is incapable of understanding & learning.

ChatGPT et al are search engines. That's it. It's just a better Google. Useful in certain situations, but pretending it's "intelligent" is outright harmful. It's harmful to people who don't understand that & take its answers at face value. It's harmful to business owners who buy into the smoke & mirrors. It's harmful to the future of real AI.

It's a fad. Like NFTs and Bitcoin. It'll have its die-hard fans, but we're already seeing the cracks - it's absorbed everything humanity's published online & it still can't write a list of real book recommendations. Kids using it to "vibe code" are learning how useless it is for real projects.

Not destroying but being real about it.

It's flawed like hell and feeling like a hype to save big tech companies, while the the enduser getting a shitty product. But companies shoving it into apps and everything, even if it degrades the user expierence (Like Duolingo)

Also, yes there need laws for that. I mean, If i download something illegaly i will nur put behind bars and can kiss my life goodbye. If a megacorp doing that to train their LLM "it's for the greater good". That's bullshit.

Honestly, at this point I'd settle for just "AI cannot be bundled with anything else."

Neither my cell phone nor TV nor thermostat should ever have a built-in LLM "feature" that sends data to an unknown black box on somebody else's server.

(I'm all down for killing with fire and debt any model built on stolen inputs,.too. OpenAI should be put in a hole so deep that they're neighbors with Napster.)

Firings and jail time.

In lieu of that, high fines and firings.

I want OpenAI to collapse.

AI models produced from copyrighted training data should need a license from the copyright holder to train using their data. This means most of the wild west land grab that is going on will not be legal. In general I'm not a huge fan of the current state of copyright at all, but that would put it on an even business footing with everything else.

I've got no idea how to fix the screeds of slop that is polluting search of all kinds now. These sorts of problems ( along the lines of email spam ) seem to be absurdly hard to fix outside of walled gardens.

Legislation

AI overall? Generally pro. LLMs and generative AI, though, I'm "against", mostly meaning that I think it's misused.

Not sure what the answer is, tbh. Reigning in corporations would be good.

I do think we as a society need to radically alter our relationship to IP law. Right now we 'enforce' IP law in a way that benefits corporations but not individuals. We should either get rid of IP law altogether (which would protect people from corporations abusing the laws) or we should enforce it more strictly, and actually hold corporations accountable for breaking it.

If we fixed that, I think gen AI would be fine. But we aren't doing that.

force companies to pay for the data they scraped from copyrighted works. break up the largest tech conglomerates so they cannot leverage their monopolistic market positions to further their goals, which includes the investment in A.I. products.

ultimately, replace the free market (cringe) with a centralized computer system to manage resource needs of a socialist state

also force Elon Musk to receive a neuralink implant and force him to hallucinate the ghostly impressions of spongebob squarepants laughing for the rest of his life (in prison)