this post was submitted on 13 Jun 2024
289 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37725 readers
541 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

As soon as Apple announced its plans to inject generative AI into the iPhone, it was as good as official: The technology is now all but unavoidable. Large language models will soon lurk on most of the world’s smartphones, generating images and text in messaging and email apps. AI has already colonized web search, appearing in Google and Bing. OpenAI, the $80 billion start-up that has partnered with Apple and Microsoft, feels ubiquitous; the auto-generated products of its ChatGPTs and DALL-Es are everywhere. And for a growing number of consumers, that’s a problem.

Rarely has a technology risen—or been forced—into prominence amid such controversy and consumer anxiety. Certainly, some Americans are excited about AI, though a majority said in a recent survey, for instance, that they are concerned AI will increase unemployment; in another, three out of four said they believe it will be abused to interfere with the upcoming presidential election. And many AI products have failed to impress. The launch of Google’s “AI Overview” was a disaster; the search giant’s new bot cheerfully told users to add glue to pizza and that potentially poisonous mushrooms were safe to eat. Meanwhile, OpenAI has been mired in scandal, incensing former employees with a controversial nondisclosure agreement and allegedly ripping off one of the world’s most famous actors for a voice-assistant product. Thus far, much of the resistance to the spread of AI has come from watchdog groups, concerned citizens, and creators worried about their livelihood. Now a consumer backlash to the technology has begun to unfold as well—so much so that a market has sprung up to capitalize on it.


Obligatory "fuck 99.9999% of all AI use-cases, the people who make them, and the techbros that push them."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 35 points 5 months ago (12 children)

It will fail. Downvote me if you must, but AI generated erotica is just as here as machine-woven textiles.

[–] Kedly@lemm.ee 3 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Which is why the term Luddite has never been more accurate than since it first started getting associated with being behind on technological progress

[–] uis@lemm.ee 10 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Luddites aren't against technological progress, they are against social regress.

[–] Kedly@lemm.ee 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Pretty sure social norms are better now than they were back when Luddites got their name associated with being against technological progress

[–] uis@lemm.ee 2 points 5 months ago
[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 5 months ago

I have never, ever heard this definition of Luddite.

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 5 months ago

Yes, that wasn't a random example for anyone OOTL. The thing the OG Luddites would do is break into factories and smash mechanical looms. They wanted to keep doing it the medieval way where you're just crossing threads by hand over and over again, because "muh jerbs".

load more comments (9 replies)