this post was submitted on 01 May 2026
201 points (93.5% liked)

Technology

84274 readers
3297 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Steve@startrek.website 15 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I think the whole point of this discussion is that the various peddlers of AI in fact do make wild claims about their capability.

[–] MagicShel@lemmy.zip -3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

My observation is that largely it's the downstream AI consumers who repackage it irresponsibly. That said, I don't hang on the words of Sam Altman and it's certain they are pushing the idea that AI is more capable than it is, but mostly what I see is them saying they built this thing and it does neat stuff and it can probably do neat stuff for you, use your imagination.

I believe a lot of the folks developing these tools would be horrified at the irresponsible ways vendors and end users are using it.

[–] XLE@piefed.social 8 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) (1 children)

Sam Altman is the face of OpenAI. He is responsible for misrepresenting the product he sells. If you're going to sling blame around, then you had better observe the words of Sam Altman.

The thing that I think will be most impactful on that five to ten year timeframe is AI will actually discover new science.

This sick man is taken seriously in mainstream media and politics, and it's no exaggeration to say he has blood on his hands.

[–] MagicShel@lemmy.zip -1 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

That's obviously bullshit but he's not telling users they can develop time travel or something. That's the distinction I would draw. He's selling investment. That's not where the end users that are misusing ChatGPT are at.

[–] XLE@piefed.social 2 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

It's the job of the company and especially the face and CEO of the company to sell the product. Compared to Sam Altman's promises, the use in this post is practically modest.

If you think this isn't the case, maybe you can point to some ChatGPT marketing that would make it clear what correct, and especially incorrect usage would look like?

[–] MagicShel@lemmy.zip 0 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

They don't. They say we made this thing, see what you can do with it. They also put disclaimers on ChatGPT to say not to rely on it to be correct.

One can infer from that, that any use for which you are relying on accuracy is incorrect use. Which is why it's critical to have any output filtered through a domain-capable human.

[–] XLE@piefed.social 2 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) (1 children)

They don't.

"The thing that I think will be most impactful on that five to ten year timeframe is AI will actually discover new science." - Sam Altman

This is what the face of OpenAI explicitly says their product is for. Do you have anything more concrete? Or am I just to buy into this infinite good faith and assume that anything dumb ~~Trump~~ Sammy says is just hyperbole?

[–] MagicShel@lemmy.zip 1 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

He's not selling anything specific and not to end users. You're talking about something completely different. The way Sam and investors and corporate customers talk about AI is pretty misleading, but it's not misleading users. No one looks at AI replacing CSRs and inventing new sciences, whatever the fuck that means, and jumps to it can unerringly diagnose a rash. And even if they did, the bot explicitly says not to trust it.

If some dirt farmer asks it how to avoid losing his family farm in a drought and takes ChatGPT's advice to plant chocolate chips and loses the farm anyway, I suggest that's a user error.

[–] XLE@piefed.social 2 points 17 hours ago

We might as well be discussing whether the tobacco industry has mislead customers because they have a little disclaimer on their cartons.

Mainstream media publishes Sammy's statements uncritically. ChatGPT releases ads. It's extremely clear he is misleading the general public, his users. I don't know why you're in denial over this.