this post was submitted on 21 Jan 2026
978 points (98.9% liked)

Fuck AI

5305 readers
955 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
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Godric@lemmy.world 7 points 9 hours ago

Look on the upside folks, at least RAM, GPU, and storage are wildly expensive. That's great for the economy and reduces the instances of people being mind-controlled by violent video games!

/s

[–] Muffi@programming.dev 3 points 7 hours ago

Maybe they are actively trying to make the crash happen while Trump is still in office to bail them out.

[–] mikedd@lemmy.world 9 points 10 hours ago
[–] Goldholz@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 8 hours ago

LET THE WORLD BURN! NO SURVIVORS! NO ECONOMY SECTOR SHALL BE LEFT STANDING!

[–] Formfiller@lemmy.world 0 points 5 hours ago
[–] _Nico198X_@europe.pub 10 points 13 hours ago

crash. and. burn.

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 15 points 15 hours ago

seems like they ran out of using AI as an excuse to lay people off and "record profits"

[–] sureshot0@discuss.online 10 points 15 hours ago

Holy shit, really?

[–] Tigeroovy@lemmy.ca 25 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

And watch them get crazy bonuses anyways and suffer no consequences.

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 4 points 15 hours ago (2 children)

they will just run to trump to beg for bailouts.

[–] ArmchairAce1944@discuss.online 6 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

I support abolishing the death penalty except for two cases.

1: war criminals (think what Israel is doing and their disgusting behavior) and anyone committing crimes under the auspices of the state expecting that protection to allow them to escape. 2: high ranking political and economic figures who fuck things up on purpose for profit.

Even mass shooters and serial killers do far less damage to society than a single one of those fucks.

[–] qyron@sopuli.xyz 2 points 10 hours ago

Someone still needs to be the executioner. Nobody should have to carry that burden.

Put them to work. And I mean basic hand labour.

Plowing fields, harvesting crops, buildings houses, paving roads, etc.

[–] Goldholz@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 8 hours ago

The AI tech comps are having too huge losses to be bailed out into a stable position

[–] AAA@feddit.org 42 points 1 day ago

Majority of CEOs tried to use Ai on the wrong level of their company: at the bottom.

[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 31 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

Majority of CEOs discover they are completely incompetent frauds to the point of literally deserving the death sentence

There, fixed the headline.

[–] PhoenixDog@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago

Majority of CEOs discover something plebs like you and I knew all along the whole time.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Fridgeratr@lemmy.dbzer0.com 39 points 1 day ago (12 children)

How could they have possibly thought AI would make them money? Lmfao. It sucks power and water just to give wrong answers or generate "art" with terrible attention to detail...

[–] Paranoidfactoid@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago

It's simple. They thought they would fire everyone and replace them with chatbots. All the admins? Chatbots. All the bookkeepers? Chatbots. Purchasing? Chatbots. Assembly lines? Robots running chatbot software.

It never occurred to them that training on large datasets does not make for good decision-making. It just makes the chatbot more wordy.

[–] canofcam@lemmy.world 0 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

I do think it's disingenuous to downplay how effective AI can be. If you ask certain AI a question, it will give you a faster and better answer than using a search engine would, and will provide sources for further reading if requested.

And the art, whilst not as good or as ethical as human art, can still be high quality.

Being against AI is completely valid, but disparaging it with falsehoods does nothing but give the feeling that you don't know what you're talking about.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 4 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

If you ask certain AI a question, it will give you a faster and better answer than using a search engine would, and will provide sources for further reading if requested.

I think that speaks to how bad search engines have gotten, not really to how good AI is. Google used to work. I promise! It used to not just be ads and SEO garbage, if you knew your special search operation functions you could find exactly what you were looking for every time. It's only because they enshitified the platform that AI search even makes sense to use.

They'll enshitify AI search soon enough and we'll be right back where we started.

[–] canofcam@lemmy.world 0 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Sure, but what I am talking about outperforms any search engine in history. If you have a specific question you will get a specific answer with AI, and usually it will be correct. If you use a search engine you can come to the same answer but it will definitely take you longer.

I'm not defending the use of AI, I'm just saying, the quality of them is not the issue. They are becoming extremely high quality with their answers and usefulness. The problem is with the ethics and energy usage.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 4 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

It used to be that the first couple results would answer the specific question, as long as you knew how to format the question in the correct search terms and with the correct special operations. What might take longer is refining the search to get extremely specific results, but that was usually only necessary if you're writing a paper or something.

But you shouldn't just trust whatever the AI says when you're writing a paper anyway, so that's not really different.

AI does allow you to skip all that and just ask a plain language question, but search didn't used to take so long if you knew how to use it. It worked.

[–] canofcam@lemmy.world 0 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Yes it worked, and still required you to dig through the answers to find the answer yourself. That is the difference. AI will search for you and collate the results to give you the definitive answer. I'm not saying searching didn't work, or doesn't even work today, I'm just saying AI is more efficient and effective and pretending it isn't is simply wrong and / or lying.

You shouldn't just trust whatever the AI says

And you also shouldn't just trust random things you read on the internet, so I'm not sure exactly what point you are making here. I've never advocated for that. I also am not sure why you keep explaining to me how good search engines used to be, seems like a strange aside considering you don't know how long I've been on the internet for.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 0 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

I can't tell if you've forgotten how good search was, are too young to know better, or were never good at using search.

I'm telling you that you didn't have to "dig through the answers" if you formatted the search well. It worked. You obviously couldn't trust everything you read on the internet, but the tricky part was formatting. No digging was required once you were good enough at key words, syntax, and search functions ("" , + - site:). Search results were incredibly efficient and effective. It was amazing.

AI is now maybe as efficient and effective as search results used to be. That's it. They ruined search and gave us AI.

And they'll ruin AI too, just you watch.

[–] canofcam@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago

You had to "dig through answers" as in, you got your answer, in the form of a website that you then had to click into and scan for the answer.

AI is far more efficient. I can't tell if you are delusional or just willfully ignorant. Ask a question and in two seconds you have a succinct answer with all of the information that using a search tool (now, and in the past) would provide you.

I also don't disagree that they will 'ruin AI', I'm not defending it or the creators of it in the slightest. I am simply saying it can be an extremely effective tool and it is without a shadow of a doubt better than using a search engine to get the answer to a question.

[–] MBech@feddit.dk 17 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It's because they have no idea what "AI" actually is. They think you tell it to make profits, and it just does so. Anyone who has used any kind of "AI" for an hour knows that it's mostly just shit at everything except the absolutely most basic shit.

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 4 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

They have no respect for the work of their employees, so they thought that they could be easily replaced by a computer program. They were so excited by the prospect of handing over ALL of our jobs to AI, that they far overextended themselves.

Now they are going to crash and burn because they bet AGAINST every worker in America, and LOST.

I hope it hurts them really, really badly. We should respond to their financial pain by laughing at them, and taking away their fortunes and their companies, since they have demonstrated so clearly that they can't be trusted to handle the American economy responsibly.

A government bailout was ALWAYS the plan.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] MyFriendGodzilla@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago

The level of schadenfreude im feeling is almost lethal.

[–] melsaskca@lemmy.ca 55 points 1 day ago (9 children)

I'm starting to think that most "business" leaders have the skills of a Trump. It's all puffery.

[–] silentjohn@lemmy.ml 49 points 1 day ago (8 children)

Have you ever talked to a CEO? Like, sit down and talk face to face? Their are dumb as rocks. They are dumb as rocks and make all the money, and just move around from company to company, running them into the ground.

[–] DrDickHandler@lemmy.world 1 points 10 hours ago

What a fucking retarded statement.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›