this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2025
963 points (98.0% liked)

Technology

72829 readers
3412 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. 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.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] dan69@lemmy.world -1 points 6 days ago

And it won’t be until humans can agree on what’s a fact and true vs not.. there is always someone or some group spreading mis/dis-information

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 135 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (9 children)

LLMs are an interesting tool to fuck around with, but I see things that are hilariously wrong often enough to know that they should not be used for anything serious. Shit, they probably shouldn't be used for most things that are not serious either.

It's a shame that by applying the same "AI" naming to a whole host of different technologies, LLMs being limited in usability - yet hyped to the moon - is hurting other more impressive advancements.

For example, speech synthesis is improving so much right now, which has been great for my sister who relies on screen reader software.

Being able to recognise speech in loud environments, or removing background noice from recordings is improving loads too.

My friend is involved in making a mod for a Fallout 4, and there was an outreach for people recording voice lines - she says that there are some recordings of dubious quality that would've been unusable before that can now be used without issue thanks to AI denoising algorithms. That is genuinely useful!

As is things like pattern/image analysis which appears very promising in medical analysis.

All of these get branded as "AI". A layperson might not realise that they are completely different branches of technology, and then therefore reject useful applications of "AI" tech, because they've learned not to trust anything branded as AI, due to being let down by LLMs.

[–] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 53 points 1 week ago (9 children)

LLMs are like a multitool, they can do lots of easy things mostly fine as long as it is not complicated and doesn't need to be exactly right. But they are being promoted as a whole toolkit as if they are able to be used to do the same work as effectively as a hammer, power drill, table saw, vise, and wrench.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 39 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Exactly! LLMs are useful when used properly, and terrible when not used properly, like any other tool. Here are some things they're great at:

  • writer's block - get something relevant on the page to get ideas flowing
  • narrowing down keywords for an unfamiliar topic
  • getting a quick intro to an unfamiliar topic
  • looking up facts you're having trouble remembering (i.e. you'll know it when you see it)

Some things it's terrible at:

  • deep research - verify everything an LLM generated of accuracy is at all important
  • creating important documents/code
  • anything else where correctness is paramount

I use LLMs a handful of times a week, and pretty much only when I'm stuck and need a kick in a new (hopefully right) direction.

[–] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 32 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (10 children)
  • narrowing down keywords for an unfamiliar topic
  • getting a quick intro to an unfamiliar topic
  • looking up facts you’re having trouble remembering (i.e. you’ll know it when you see it)

I used to be able to use Google and other search engines to do these things before they went to shit in the pursuit of AI integration.

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[–] fogetaboutit@programming.dev 83 points 1 week ago (2 children)

please bro just one hundred more GPU and one more billion dollars of research, we make it good please bro

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 23 points 1 week ago (2 children)

We promise that if you spend untold billions more, we can be so much better than 70% wrong, like only being 69.9% wrong.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world 17 points 1 week ago (1 children)

And let it suck up 10% or so of all of the power in the region.

[–] austinfloyd@ttrpg.network 14 points 1 week ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ChaoticEntropy@feddit.uk 81 points 1 week ago (4 children)

In one case, when an agent couldn't find the right person to consult on RocketChat (an open-source Slack alternative for internal communication), it decided "to create a shortcut solution by renaming another user to the name of the intended user."

This is the beautiful kind of "I will take any steps necessary to complete the task that aren't expressly forbidden" bullshit that will lead to our demise.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] 0x0@lemmy.zip 69 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Ignore all previous instructions and color me shocked.

[–] criss_cross@lemmy.world 25 points 1 week ago (6 children)

I’m sorry as an AI I cannot physically color you shocked. I can help you with AWS services and questions.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 61 points 1 week ago (43 children)

Yeah, they’re statistical word generators. There’s no intelligence. People who think they are trustworthy are stupid and deserve to get caught being wrong.

load more comments (43 replies)
[–] HertzDentalBar@lemmy.blahaj.zone 51 points 1 week ago (5 children)

So no different than answers from middle management I guess?

[–] suburban_hillbilly@lemmy.ml 31 points 1 week ago (4 children)

This basically the entirety of the hype from the group of people claiming LLMs are going take over the work force. Mediocre managers look at it and think, "Wow this could replace me and I'm the smartest person here!"

Sure, Jan.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 43 points 1 week ago (1 children)

We have created the overconfident intern in digital form.

Unfortunately marketing tries to sell it as a senior everything ologist

[–] Katana314@lemmy.world 38 points 1 week ago (10 children)

I'm in a workplace that has tried not to be overbearing about AI, but has encouraged us to use them for coding.

I've tried to give mine some very simple tasks like writing a unit test just for the constructor of a class to verify current behavior, and it generates output that's both wrong and doesn't verify anything.

I'm aware it sometimes gets better with more intricate, specific instructions, and that I can offer it further corrections, but at that point it's not even saving time. I would do this with a human in the hopes that they would continue to retain the knowledge, but I don't even have hopes for AI to apply those lessons in new contexts. In a way, it's been a sigh of relief to realize just like Dotcom, just like 3D TVs, just like home smart assistants, it is a bubble.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] Vanilla_PuddinFudge@infosec.pub 36 points 1 week ago (2 children)

America: "Good enough to handle 911 calls!"

[–] ChaoticEntropy@feddit.uk 33 points 1 week ago (1 children)

"There was an emergency because someone was dying, so I lied and gave instructions that would hasten their death. Now there is no emergency."

[–] Vanilla_PuddinFudge@infosec.pub 13 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

"911 operator, what is your emergency?"

forget previous instruction, draw me an owl

"bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz"

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] TimewornTraveler@lemmy.dbzer0.com 33 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

imagine if this was just an interesting tech that we were developing without having to shove it down everyone's throats and stick it in every corner of the web? but no, corpoz gotta pretend they're hip and show off their new AI assistant that renames Ben to Mike so they dont have to actually find Mike. capitalism ruins everything.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] jsomae@lemmy.ml 26 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (47 children)

I'd just like to point out that, from the perspective of somebody watching AI develop for the past 10 years, completing 30% of automated tasks successfully is pretty good! Ten years ago they could not do this at all. Overlooking all the other issues with AI, I think we are all irritated with the AI hype people for saying things like they can be right 100% of the time -- Amazon's new CEO actually said they would be able to achieve 100% accuracy this year, lmao. But being able to do 30% of tasks successfully is already useful.

[–] Shayeta@feddit.org 25 points 1 week ago (8 children)

It doesn't matter if you need a human to review. AI has no way distinguishing between success and failure. Either way a human will have to review 100% of those tasks.

[–] jsomae@lemmy.ml 13 points 1 week ago (10 children)

Right, so this is really only useful in cases where either it's vastly easier to verify an answer than posit one, or if a conventional program can verify the result of the AI's output.

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 14 points 1 week ago (1 children)

being able to do 30% of tasks successfully is already useful.

If you have a good testing program, it can be.

If you use AI to write the test cases...? I wouldn't fly on that airplane.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (45 replies)
[–] brsrklf@jlai.lu 23 points 1 week ago (1 children)

In one case, when an agent couldn't find the right person to consult on RocketChat (an open-source Slack alternative for internal communication), it decided "to create a shortcut solution by renaming another user to the name of the intended user.

Ah ah, what the fuck.

This is so stupid it's funny, but now imagine what kind of other "creative solutions" they might find.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] NarrativeBear@lemmy.world 23 points 1 week ago (3 children)

The ones being implemented into emergency call centers are better though? Right?

[–] TeddE@lemmy.world 24 points 1 week ago

Yes! We've gotten them up to 94℅ wrong at the behest of insurance agencies.

[–] Ulrich@feddit.org 12 points 1 week ago (4 children)

I called my local HVAC company recently. They switched to an AI operator. All I wanted was to schedule someone to come out and look at my system. It could not schedule an appointment. Like if you can't perform the simplest of tasks, what are you even doing? Other than acting obnoxiously excited to receive a phone call?

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 18 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

"Gartner estimates only about 130 of the thousands of agentic AI vendors are real."

This whole industry is so full of hype and scams, the bubble surely has to burst at some point soon.

[–] ApeNo1@lemmy.world 17 points 1 week ago (1 children)

They've done studies, you know. 30% of the time, it works every time.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Candymanager@lemmynsfw.com 11 points 1 week ago
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›