h0tbeef

joined 1 week ago
[–] h0tbeef@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

Not really, they’re just lying to try to fleece more investors

[–] h0tbeef@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

I mostly agree with you, but AI cannot “act autonomously”. You prompt it, and it acts based off of that prompt.

Think of it like doing the laundry: I load my clothes in and “prompt” the washing machine to do my laundry.

When the washing machine switches from the rinse cycle to the spin cycle, it’s not acting autonomously, it’s continuing to execute my prompt.

Is AI capable of doing something you didn’t expect it to do? Yes. Does that mean it’s acting autonomously? No.

I would also argue that the “power” of LLMs is vastly overstated. A large part of that is for the exact reason you say tho, people with zero knowledge or skill are playing with fire; And when they get burned they blame the machinery, not the operator.

[–] h0tbeef@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 hours ago

I mean, I guess if you wanted your documentation and reports to be worthless slop bullshit that could work.

Companies do those things for a reason tho, and they’d want them to be accurate.

[–] h0tbeef@lemmy.zip 8 points 3 hours ago

Every story you read about how their AI is “so powerful it’s scary” or where they characterize the AI as “going rogue” or some other dumb shit like that is manufactured in an attempt to impress investors

[–] h0tbeef@lemmy.zip 1 points 7 hours ago

I can’t believe I have to keep explaining this to people, lmao

First of all, this is a math equation. Math is what computers do, they are essentially really fucking good calculators.

That math problem hadn’t been solved before, that’s true, however, if you actually read the excerpt you just shared, you’ll see that the equation was solved using preexisting theories and formulas. Ergo, humans had already manufactured every individual piece of the puzzle, and had used them in other contexts that the AI could be fed and then reuse.

Saying that AI came up with the solution isn’t the full story. That’s like saying that AI created a shitty piece of slop art. It did no such thing, it plagiarized a bunch of work from other people and essentially made it into a collage.

When MC Hammer (rather, his producer) sampled Rick James for “Can’t touch this”, did he become the bass player? No, that was still Rick James, they just took his song and altered it to make theirs.

[–] h0tbeef@lemmy.zip 5 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Gotcha, well that’s a different issue (one I believe expands beyond self-driving cars to all new cars that are way more computer integrated than they should be).

Getting hacked is a good reason to be skeptical tho, it’s probably the slickest way to kill someone and make it seem like an accident.

[–] h0tbeef@lemmy.zip 16 points 8 hours ago (3 children)

I’m a good driver, and AI is fucking stupid.

The only way you could possibly convince me to even get into a self driving car would be if my only other option was to get into a self flying helicopter.

Also, just to nitpick, the self driving car can’t “go rogue”, that would imply that it has consciousness, sentience, an understanding of what it’s actually doing, judgement, etc. a bunch of shit it doesn’t have. Self driving cars can and do “malfunction” frequently, but they can’t “go rogue”.

Don’t let the techno fascists’ constant anthropomorphic descriptions of their fuckware chat bots confuse you.

[–] h0tbeef@lemmy.zip 0 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (2 children)

What tedious work?

In order to answer that question, you would first need to know how to make AGI (this is not known to anyone).

In order to know how to emulate human intelligence, you would first need to understand how human intelligence is constructed (this is not known to anyone).

In order to understand how human intelligence is constructed, you would have to understand how human cognition works (this is not known to anyone).

In order to understand how human cognition works, you would need to understand how the exact mechanisms upon which human brain works in the first place function (this is not known to anyone).

I could continue, but you should get it by now.

[–] h0tbeef@lemmy.zip 1 points 10 hours ago (6 children)

An LLM cannot do that either.

An LLM can only ever rearrange what is put into it and shit it back out. You’re never going to get any knowledge out of it that wasn’t previously fed into it (and even then it hallucinates and doesn’t know shit because it’s literally just code).

We do not know how to make an AGI, ergo LLMs do not “know” how to make an AGI (and in fact, don’t actually know shit at all).

[–] h0tbeef@lemmy.zip 67 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (3 children)

They’re not escaping users control, they’re fucking computer programs.

People are using them irresponsibly.

If you accidentally run someone over in your car, the car didn’t “escape your control”, you just did a shitty job of controlling the car.

It’s not the same thing.

(Fuck “AI” btw)

[–] h0tbeef@lemmy.zip 1 points 22 hours ago

The limit for what?

The bottom line is that AI is both more expensive and less productive than humans for at least 99% of tasks

[–] h0tbeef@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Wouldn’t something like that be machinery the saw company already owns?

Does slop not involve expensive machinery?

view more: next ›