this post was submitted on 11 Jun 2025
509 points (96.2% liked)

Microblog Memes

10885 readers
1138 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

RULES:

  1. Your post must be a screen capture of a microblog-type post that includes the UI of the site it came from, preferably also including the avatar and username of the original poster. Including relevant comments made to the original post is encouraged.
  2. Your post, included comments, or your title/comment should include some kind of commentary or remark on the subject of the screen capture. Your title must include at least one word relevant to your post.
  3. You are encouraged to provide a link back to the source of your screen capture in the body of your post.
  4. Current politics and news are allowed, but discouraged. There MUST be some kind of human commentary/reaction included (either by the original poster or you). Just news articles or headlines will be deleted.
  5. Doctored posts/images and AI are allowed, but discouraged. You MUST indicate this in your post (even if you didn't originally know). If an image is found to be fabricated or edited in any way and it is not properly labeled, it will be deleted.
  6. Absolutely no NSFL content.
  7. Be nice. Don't take anything personally. Take political debates to the appropriate communities. Take personal disagreements & arguments to private messages.
  8. No advertising, brand promotion, or guerrilla marketing.

RELATED COMMUNITIES:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
ReadyUser31@lemmy.world
aeronmelon@lemmy.world
needanke@feddit.org
509
Nook to D4, Great Point I mean D3, i mean 3D (lemmy.blahaj.zone)
submitted 8 months ago by not_IO@lemmy.blahaj.zone to c/microblogmemes@lemmy.world
74 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

https://twipped.social/@twipped/114662771295312758

article they are referencing: https://futurism.com/atari-beats-chatgpt-chess

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] jsomae@lemmy.ml -2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Massive environmental harms

I find this questionable; people forget that a locally-hosted LLM is no more taxing than a video game.

No chance it’s going to get better

Why do you believe this? It has continued to get dramatically better over the past 5 years. Look at where GPT2 was in 2019.

No consistently usable product other than beginner code tasks

It is not consistently usable for coding. If you are hoping this slop-producing machine is consistently useful for anything then you are sorely mistaken. These things are most suitable for applications where unreliability is acceptable.

No profitable product [...] Tens of thousands of (useful!) careers terminated

Do you not see the obvious contradiction here? If you are sure that this is not going to get better and it's not profitable, then you have nothing to worry about in the long-term about careers being replaced by AIs.

Destroyed Internet search, arguably the one necessary service on the Internet

Google did this intentionally as part of enshittification.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Massive environmental harms

I find this questionable; people forget that a locally-hosted LLM is no more taxing than a video game.

So read and learn.

No chance it’s going to get better

Why do you believe this? It has continued to get dramatically better over the past 5 years. Look at where GPT2 was in 2019.

Fair enough. It's not going to get better because the fundamental problem is AI as represented by, say, ChatGPT doesn't know anything. It has no understanding of anything it's "saying". Therefore, any results derived from ChatGPT or equivalent, will need to be double-checked in any serious endeavor. So, yes it can poop out a legal brief in two seconds but it still has to be revised, refined, and inevitably fixed when it hallucinates precedent citations and just about anything else. That, the core of it, will never get better. It might get faster. It might "sound" "more human". But it won't get better.

No profitable product [...] Tens of thousands of (useful!) careers terminated

Do you not see the obvious contradiction here? If you are sure that this is not going to get better and it's not profitable, then you have nothing to worry about in the long-term about careers being replaced by AIs.

Well tell that to the half a million people laid off in the last couple of years. Damage is done. Also, the bubble is still growing, and if you haven't noticed what AI has done to the HR industry, let me summarize it thusly: it has destroyed it.

Destroyed Internet search, arguably the one necessary service on the Internet

Google did this intentionally as part of enshittification.

Well, yes. Every company which has chosen to promote and focus on AI has done so intentionally. That doesn't mean it's good. If AI wasn't the all-hype vaporware it is, this wouldn't have been an option. If OpenAI had been honest about it and said "it's very interesting and we're still working on it" instead of "it's absolutely going to change the world in six months" this wouldn't be the unusable shitpile it is.

[–] jsomae@lemmy.ml 2 points 8 months ago

I don't think we disagree that much.

So read and learn. Okay, I agree that it can have environmental impact due to power usage and water consumption. But this isn't a fundamental problem -- we can use green power (I've heard there are plans to build nuclear plants in California for this reason) and build them in a place without water shortages (i.e. somewhere other than California.) AI differs from fossil fuels in this regard, which are fundamentally environmentally damaging.

But still, I cringe when someone implies open-model locally-hosted AIs are environmentally problematic. They have no sense of scale whatsoever.

But it still has to be revised, refined, and inevitably fixed when it hallucinates precedent citations and just about anything else. Well yeah, it's slop, as I said. These are only suitable in cases where complete reliability is not required. But there's no reason to believe that hallucinations won't decrease in frequency over time (as they already have been), or at that the domains in which hallucinations are common won't shrink over time. I'm not claiming these methods will ever reach 100% reliability, but humans (the thing they are meant to replace) also don't have reliability. So how many years until the reliability of an LLM exceeds that of a human? Yes I know I'm making humans sound fungible, but to our corporate overlords we mostly are.

if you haven’t noticed what AI has done to the HR industry, let me summarize it thusly: it has destroyed it.

Good, so we agree that there is the potential for long-term damage. In other words, AIs are a long-term threat, not just a short-term one. Maybe the bubble will pop but so did the dotcom bubble and we still have the internet.

enshittification

No, I think enshittification started well before 2022 (ChatGPT). Sure, even before that LLMs were making SEO garbage webpages that google was reporting, so you can blame AI in that regard -- but I don't believe for a second that Google couldn't have found a way to filter those kinds of results out. The user-negative feature was profitable for them, so they didn't fix it. If LLMs hadn't been around, they would have found other ways to make search more user-negative (and they probably did indeed employ such techniques).