this post was submitted on 27 Apr 2026
1174 points (98.6% liked)
Technology
84200 readers
4126 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I mean that's kinda the whole point.
Companies are looking at AI to replace people. Either it's ready or it's not.
If you need to treat it like it's an intern, then it's not worth the expense. Anyone hiring interns to be productive doesn't understand why you hire an intern.
As if a 90$/month intern wasn't a good deal lol
You don't hire interns for productivity. If you're intern program is any good it's a time/resource sink. However, it's a good recruiting pipeline and provides young people an opportunity to get real world experience.
Because it's unethical. I've been in business for 10+ years but i never hired an intern because i don't find it fair to make someone work for less than minimum wage, and i don't have the structure required to really teach them anything. I have bad fundamentals and only ever learnt by doing, so having an intern while it may help me wouldn't really help them and that's not a deal i'm willing to make. Probably why i'm not super successful lol
That being said, i don't see any problem with making a GPU cry somewhere in California for my menial tasks. And it's tremendously effective too, for a hundred bucks a month i get a lot of shit done that would take me ages. I don't give it access to anything critical so it can't fuck my shit up and i come out on top as long as the tokens are subsidized by dumb VC money.
Right now it's somewhere between a smart intern and a smart recent grad. A lot depends on what Skills.md and frameworks your org has set up.
No it's not. You're giving it way too much credit.
I actually think it's better than that and when you set up multiple pipelines that interact and cross check it starts to ramp up. Definitely true Lemmy has its head in the sand about it though.
This. Yes it seems wasteful or whatever but you need bots with prompts that review the work, kick it back to the coder bot to re-do, yadda. But at the end of the day you have a thing that Fixes Your Bugs and Implements Basic Features For You.
Is it really fixing if it's only short-term with mounting technical debt?
Gogo gadget inefficient hallucinating predictive text generator grift
People don't wanna hear that around here. But I agree, with the right instructions it's better than a junior Dev. Loads faster, and mistakes can be fixed faster, and if you update the prompts then it learns better from mistakes too.
People don't want to hear it anywhere because you're lauding the benefits of a parasitic technology which is inherently hostile towards workers.
And if you're getting paid for it, it makes you a parasite too, or at least more complicit than the average person.
Maybe your position would be better served by not lashing out at people as if they're your enemy.
Multiple things can be true at the same time. Statements about the technical capability of a technology don't detract from the negative impacts on the world. Those are two different topics.
Fossil fuels have incredibly massive, civilization-scale problems that are actively harming the modern world AND ALSO have enabled industrialization, pulling billions out of poverty.
AI is objectively capable at some tasks AND ALSO is being used to disrupt the labor market and causing other harmful effects in society.
The world isn't black and white
OMG adult balanced take with no detectable outrage
I'll see you in Sort By: Controversial
Black and white, no, but things can be evaluated on their net impact. And in that evaluation, AI is shit.
I understand the arguments, today isn't my first day on the Internets.
The comment that was responded to was in a conversation talking about the technical capabilities and how it doesn't matter what the truth is on that topic because some people don't want to hear it because they only can view AI in a 2-diminsional, black or white, net good or net bad way.
Then you showed up like a caricature of the type of irrationality that they were discussing.
I even explained the, very obvious, context that you breezed right passed and yet you're still grinding that same talking point without a moment of self reflection.
Viewing things for their net impact is not "irrational" just because you don't like the conclusions reached.
woosh.gif
It didn't go over my head. You're just wrong.
I honestly think, it's very cool for prototyping ideas at this point. It's also parasitic. Although I think because of (maybe) different reasons: It gives people the power (which they unfortunately use way too much) to imitate an art, but in an non-arty imperfect way that doesn't comprehend details (of the art), resulting in slop. For software that can go very wrong as we see here. This is also a reason why I mostly quit open-source, because now everyone can code a bad version of a library, it sucked the art out of good open source etc. and it's increasingly difficult because of good wording/"look" etc. to differentiate on quality of code, previously you could often check a code-base review it somewhat and know how good the quality is, now it's more like "is this slop or not?" (in which case I go a big circle around it, because reviewing is often not worth it)
At some point though, I think this automation of work is inevitable, we need to think about a society that can peacefully exist without having the requirement to work to exist. I actually think this could easily be utopian, everyone can focus on what they actually think is fulfilling life.
Though, it's sad and concerning that technology is developing faster than society can adapt, which is why I'm mostly with you, because people (or representatives like politicians) just aren't "programmed" for these fast-paced changes, to adapt the technology such that the future may be more utopian as it currently is heading towards a dystopian future...
Is it okay for Skrillex to make loops? For Vanilla Ice or MC Hammer to sample?
Every commercial use of AI negatively impacts the environment in order to further the interests of capital and is therefore inherently immoral.
If we were in a nuclear fusion or otherwise all-renewable-energy-with-plenty-of-excess world, then I'd be more aligned with your mindset and agree that only uses which bastardize art / etc are immoral.
The fact is, it can be a very useful technology when deployed sensibly. Yes, it's going to inflict massive harm on society in multiple ways - but just dismissing it as shit is putting your head in the sand. We need to be figuring out how to ensure that the harm it does is minimised and ideally that it's used in ways that benefit us all. Fuck knows how though.
But it's not just going to go away, no matter how much we might want it to.
It destroys the environment inherently by virtue of its operation (in the context of our current energy infrastructure). I do not care how "useful" it is to you or any corporation if it takes even a single living organism off of this earth.
I dismiss it as shit and I don't need your approval to do so. Medical and scientific applications are acceptable. Nothing else, no exceptions.