Ask Lemmy

What is your viewpoint?
Mine, for example, is that not only I don't need it at all but it doesn't offer anything of value to me so I can't think of any use for it.

One Thing to note: if you're strictly against it then you are on fact an AI vegan.

And that's okay!

Just like veganism you need to be clear though to us to help you answer that question:

1. what IS your reason? "At all" as absolute is not objectively feasible for all situations no matter your logic (stealing --> use an open model like apertus; energy --> link it to your solar panels, unreliable --> wrong use case, etc etc)

2. why do you want to convince others?

The issue is: you need to be honest to yourself AND to us to have a proper exchange.

"It doesn't feel right and I want to limit it's spread" is a way better answer then some stuff that sounds right but that are not grounded in your personal reality.

I just mentioned to a friend of mine why I don't use AI. My hatred towards AI strives from people making it seem sentient, the companies business model, and of course, privacy.

First off, to clear any misconception, AI is not a sentient being, it does not know how to critical think, and it's incapable of creating thoughts outside from the data it's trained on. Technically speaking, a LLM is a lossy compression model, which means it takes what is effectively petabytes of information and compresses it down to a sheer 40Gb. When it gets uncompressed it doesnt uncompress the entire petabytes of information it uncompresses the response that it was trained from.

There are several issues I can think of that makes the LLM do poorly at it's job. remember LLM's are trained exclusively on the internet, as large as the internet is, it doesn't have everything, your codebase of a skiplist implementation is probably not going to be the same from on the internet. Assuming you have a logic error in your skiplist implementation, and you ask chatGPT "whats the issue with my codebase" it will notice the code you provided isn't what it was trained on and will actively try to fix it digging you into a deeper rabbit hole then when you began the implementation.

On the other hand, if you ask chatGPT to derive a truth table given the following sum of minterms, it will not ever be correct unless heavily documented (IE: truth table of an adder/subtractor). This is the simplest example I could give where these LLMs cannot critical think, cannot recognize pattrrns, and only regurgitate the information it has been trained on. It will try to produce a solution but it will always fail.

This leads me to my first point why I refuse to use LLMs, it unintentionally fabricates a lot of the information and treat it as if it's true, when I started

This reminds me of those posts from anti-vaxers who complain about not being able to find good studies or sources that support their opinion.

I am telling people to refrain from wasting my time with parrotted training data and that there is no "I" in LLMs. And that using them harms the brain and the corporations behind are evil to the core. But yeah, mostly I give up beyond "please don't bother me with this"

Most people are against AI because of what corporations are doing with it. What do you expect corporations and governments are going to do with any new scientific or technological advance? Use it for for the benefit of humanity? Are you going to stop using computers because coorporations use them for their benefit harming the environment with their huge data centers? By rejecting the use of this new technological advance you are avoiding to take advantage of free and open source AI tools, that you can run locally on your computer, for whatever you consider a good cause. Fortunately many people who care about other human beings are more intelligent and are starting to use AI for what it really is, A TOOL.

"According to HRF’s announcement, the initiative aims to help global audiences better understand the dual nature of artificial intelligence: while it can be used by dictatorships to suppress dissent and monitor populations, it can also be a powerful instrument of liberation when placed in the hands of those fighting for freedom."

HRF AI Initiative

Fundamentally what is evil about AI is that it is part of a growing global movement towards increasingly not seeing value in human beings but rather in abstracted forms of capital and power.

Irrespective of how well AI works or how quickly it evolves, what makes it awful is how it is in almost every manifestation it is a rejection of the potential of humanity. Cool things can be done with AI/pattern matching technology, but the thinking that gave birth to and arose around these tools is incredibly dangerous. The social contract has been broken by an extremist embrace of the value of computers and the corporations that own them over the value of human lives. Not only is this disgusting from an ethical standpoint, it is also senseless, no matter how powerful AI gets if we are interested in different forms of intelligence we MUST be humanists since by far the most abundant diversity of intelligence on earth is human/organic and this will continue to be the case long into the future.

What defenders of AI and people with a neutral opinion towards AI miss is that you cannot separate the ideology and the technology with "AI". AI in its meteoric economic acceleration (in terms of investment not profit) is a manifestation of the desire of the ruling class to fully extract the working class from their profit mechanisms. There is no neutrality to the technology of AI since almost the entire story of how, why and what AI has been has been determined by the desires of ideologies that are hostile to valuing human life at a basic level and that should alarm everyone.

Check out wheresyoured.at for some "haters guides."

My general take is that virtually none of the common "useful" forms of AI are even remotely sustainable strictly from a financial standpoint, so there's not use getting too excited about them.