this post was submitted on 30 May 2026
393 points (99.0% liked)

Fuck AI

7558 readers
701 users here now

"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"

A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.

AI, in this case, refers to LLMs, GPT technology, and anything listed as "AI" meant to increase market valuations.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://infosec.pub/post/47200357

One critic called the move “petulance beyond measure.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] wylinka@szmer.info 64 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Battle lines are being drawn between two camps of developers: so-called vibecoders, on the one side—those who wholeheartedly embrace handing over complex coding tasks to AI tools—and on the other, those of a more puritan persuasion, who prefer to keep AI out of the codebase.

What a terrible article. That's not what vibe coding means.

[–] lemon@sh.itjust.works 27 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Yeah, that’s really dishonest framing. The whole point of vibe coding is not reading the code but trusting in its correctness based on vibes. That’s fine for low-risk internal programs, but just a downright terrible strategy for anything else, even if you have an independent test suite. Those tests may pass, but the implementation itself will be an unreadable mess

[–] Railcar8095@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

At least it outputs an unreadable mess in 20 mins, rather than 2 weeks

[–] Croquette@sh.itjust.works 18 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Guess I am a puritan for not wanting garbage that burns the planet in my everyday life I guess.

[–] lastweakness@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

How about the smaller open source models? Is the impact the same? I'm also wondering how much DeepSeek v4 changes this since the inference costs are several times lower than before. I'm sure there's still a lot of negative effects, but I'm wondering if the needle has moved at all.

[–] Croquette@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Until the datasets to train the models are curated and paid for, there won't be an ethical LLM.

I haven't looked into smaller models, but I'd wager that training the models is still power intensive.

And finally, how the LLM are used currently make them a net negative.

[–] lastweakness@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I understand the lack of ethics and I agree that their current mode of use is definitely a net negative, but was wondering more about the impact on the environment specifically.

[–] Croquette@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago

It still takes a lot of energy to train the local models, only to get a bullshit generator.

[–] Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Is there a better definition (I understand the articles one is kind of shitty)? Personally I do query the bot for various reasons but I'm not delegating complex problem solving to it, obviously.

[–] wylinka@szmer.info 2 points 1 month ago

I would say accepting AI code without review, without having to understand any of the code.