this post was submitted on 18 Oct 2026
107 points (95.0% liked)

Fuck AI

8574 readers
1416 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.

Rules:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] john_lemmy@slrpnk.net 11 points 1 week ago (2 children)

But if the only useful approach is built around discipline alone for a tool that is meant to be used for all, isn't it, at a group level, a failing proposition?

Anecdotal, but the coworkers I know that have the most discipline and care about their output are the ones that use it the least.

[–] Funkt4st1c@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago

Yeah, also anecdotal, but the ones who use it the most at my job are also the most insufferable and have nothing to say during meetings

[–] valaramech@fedia.io 1 points 1 week ago

My opinion is that there isn't a one-size-fits-all answer to this question. There exists a class of software for which the detriments of using LLMs in a non-disciplined way is kinda irrelevant. Generally, this is the kind of software that isn't worth the money that would be spent on an actual developer. These would be, like, very small user-base internal applications.

I might also argue against the "meant to be used for all" part of that statement. That's the way that AI companies - and many execs - are trying to position LLMs, but I don't think that's the reality of their usefulness. Kent Beck did a pretty good talk about this recently that I think summarizes the position well. LLMs let you make mistakes in days that used to take months. The corollary to that is that they also enable you to fix those mistakes in days instead of months, but that requires understanding, thought, and patience.