this post was submitted on 28 Jun 2025
64 points (94.4% liked)

Technology

72015 readers
2736 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
top 10 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Dojan@pawb.social 1 points 1 hour ago

This is so funny. It fails miserably and they’re all “yeah so this is promising.”

Sure, a world where your manager hallucinates meetings with you and assesses you poorly for not performing according to plans that were hallucinated through said meetings sounds like a fantastic idea.

[–] dhork@lemmy.world 16 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (1 children)

It is an interesting article, even if it's conclusions are entirely too rosy. The "storefront" was a single vending machine, and the bot was instructed to interact with Anthropic employees (with an hourly cost attached) to do all physical interactions. While the bot did a decent job managing the stock most of the time, it made a lot of bad decisions based on trying to be too helpful to it's customers. It also frequently hallucinated, with some hilarious results I wont spoil here. But as anyone who owns a small business knows, one bad decision could put it under, so saying that an AI can manage a vending machine well "most of the time" is equivalent to saying it cant do the job at all.

Their conclusion is that with a bit more work, Claude might be able to perform as a middle-manager. To me, that says more about how useless middle-management is than how capable their AI is.

[–] sepi@piefed.social 4 points 12 hours ago

So what you are saying is the AI is ready to replace tech CEOs.

[–] A_norny_mousse@feddit.org 20 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Anybody who thought the answer could have been even remotely close to Yes is delusional.

[–] Womble@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I doubt anyone expected it to work completely, but it is interesting to see to what extent it worked and how it failed (halucinations and sycophancy)

[–] A_norny_mousse@feddit.org 2 points 23 hours ago

True; I just hate headlines that ask stupid questions.

But then again, there's always the premise that it could work, in such attempts, which annoys me no less.

[–] Uff@lemmy.world 3 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

This shit needs to start being regulated.

[–] Pro@programming.dev 0 points 22 hours ago (1 children)
[–] Uff@lemmy.world 4 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

AI needs to be regulated. It's already creeping everywhere. People getting fired and replaced with sloppy AI, holding petabytes of people's data and work hostage, the list goes on. You can't even ask a question without being asked for personal data to the AI and you certainly can't do whatever you want with it.

If it's going to replace humans, it needs to be regulated like one.

[–] Grimy@lemmy.world 0 points 19 hours ago

There is currently no regulation against humans creating slop or making bad business decisions. Prohibiting the use of tools for certain tasks to save jobs is a recipe for disaster, which is actually what you are saying I think.