this post was submitted on 07 Aug 2026
124 points (94.3% liked)
Technology
86957 readers
2692 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- 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.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You have your definition of useful, I have mine. Maybe predictability is important to many others, but not to you.
Music is NOT a tool.
Its more like not using a screwdriver and using only a hammer. And that would be fine - if you only have nails.
And this argument about different definitions is fundamentally dishonest under a comment that say broadly we don’t like AI. I have my definitions of interesting, useful and fun. But if I would make a post about, I would be torn apart here, lol.
I use music as a tool to relax. If the music isn't relaxing, I don't like it, and I won't listen to it. See how that works?
No, it's like using a jackhammer when you need a chisel. You have to repair most of the shit instead of doing it right the first time.
And you get progressively worse at using the chisel when you only use a jackhammer for everything.
I think music is so much more than a tool. But I‘m not here to argue over music. I get your point.
So you don’t see any merit in current AI at all? Do you thin it will vanish like the blockchain fad?
If I'm trying to fasten something, and the screwdriver fucks up half the time, then yeah I'm going to nail it together instead. Or use glue, or anything but an unreliable screwdriver.
Thats the thing. AI doesn’t fuck up all the time and has gotten genuinely useful for some things in the last months.
But a huge amount of you doesn’t know this or doesn’t care, generating an insufferable, ignorant circlejerk, drowning out every interesting discussion you can have about this topic.
If I had an employee that fucked up as often and confidently as LLMs do, I would terminate their employment. I don’t have the time or patience to redo all their work because I can’t trust them. If a brand had quality issues at as high a rate as LLM output, I would avoid buying anything related to that brand.
A human being or company can make some amount of mistakes and that’s completely understandable, and I think it’s perfectly fair to hold LLMs to that standard. That said, with a human being I can stress how important some task is and they don’t double or triple check their when it is that important, I can not and will not trust them. If I tell a company “hey this is important to me”, they will usually make extra effort to make sure it’s correct, and if they fail to do so, a decent company will make an extra effort to make things right. An LLM will offer an empty apology and spew more bullshit at me that I still have to verify.
The fact that AI gets things right often enough for you is great. Maybe I have higher standards, maybe I need higher quality output, or maybe I have trust issues. Everyone has a different threshold. Just because yours is much different than the people here doesn’t mean their opinions are invalid, and the way you dismiss everyone’s opinions and insist that it’s good enough makes you seem just as insufferable and ignorant as you accuse others of being.
The fact that LLM output has improved is great, but it is still so far from meeting much less exceeding my threshold that it’s beyond frustrating to keep being told over and over that “no bro, it’s good now”. I’ve been hearing that for over two years and it’s still not close to where I would trust it to answer questions, much less perform actions on my computer with access to my personal data.
You need to learn that some people are different than you and understand where they’re coming from if you want to have an “interesting discussion… about this topic”, rather than getting frustrated that people don’t agree with you and rage quitting.
Who said all the time? The problem is most people can't tell which half it's fucking up. An unreliable tool isn't useful
Hmm. They fuck up 50 percent of the time? I not only doubt that, I know that this is wrong. No offense. Do you actively use LMMs?
No. Because they fuck up so often.
Why would I keep using a broken tool?
Gotcha. You‘re one of those guys talking out of their arse.
That is what people have said, every day, on repeat, for the last three years. Explain why it is better now instead of three months ago, when it was definitely not fucking up all the time and then I will copypaste that back to you for what was said three months ago for the same question.
Which standards are you gonna hold it to? The benchmarking involves using standardized testing, but they typically just feed those questions into the testing data, so the tests have to be constantly updated, and when they are, you will not be surprised to learn that the machines goes back to fucking up the answers all the time.
Experts in their fields do not use this shit because it is wrong on the things they know, but, oh wow, it must be totally right about the things I don't know anything about? Every time.
Oh, just shut the fuck up.
https://www.theregister.com/software/2026/03/26/linux-kernel-czar-says-ai-bug-reports-arent-slop-anymore/5226256
Act civil in the comments, dude.
Cool. Now in three months, I can repaste this reply back to you! Thank you!
Some tools are useless, period.
I think AI is like being given an automatic screwdriver with the speed maxed to shit. If you pay super close attention, you might be able to do things faster, with hypervigilance and expert knowledge. In most cases, though, you won't. Congratulations, you have screwed in 100 screws, mostly incorrectly and stripped, when everyone else did 30, and you have fucked over the people who have to fix your shit.
I think AI agents are a lot like a chainsaw - they can save you a lot of time vs other tools for the same job, but... you can also screw up with them rather easily.
Fortunately, I just write software with LLM agents, if it comes out badly I can start over with nothing lost but time. My experience of the last few months has been: it actually writes some pretty good software, if you know anything about writing good software with teams of people and apply that knowledge to managing the LLM agents. If you're just some guy who doesn't really know how to write software, LLM agents aren't always going to save you from yourself, just like a chainsaw won't.
Good analogy! But I disagree.
https://www.theregister.com/software/2026/03/26/linux-kernel-czar-says-ai-bug-reports-arent-slop-anymore/5226256