this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2026
50 points (83.8% liked)

Ask Lemmy

38559 readers
1629 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, toxicity and dog-whistling are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

You can take "justifiable" to mean whatever you feel it means in this context. e.g. Morally, artistically, environmentally, etc.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Atomic@sh.itjust.works 2 points 4 hours ago

I've always said I think it's fine in filler content, it can allow small teams to quickly population their world with background stuff that you never notice. Except when it's not there.

But with great power comes great responsibility. And I don't necssesarily think most can handle that.

[–] jtrek@startrek.website 3 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

I have used copilot a couple times to be like "I have this scenario and want to do this. What are my options?". I'd rather have a good Internet search and real people, but that's all shitted up.

The answers from the LLM aren't even consistently good. If I didn't know programming I wouldn't be able to use this information effectively. That's probably why a lot of vibe coding is so bad.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

Same.

  • i think of search as a summary of the first page of search results. It takes slightly longer to come back but might save you time evaluating. But much of the time you do need to click into original source
  • ai writing unfortunately is valued at my company. I suppose it helps us engineers write more effective docs, but they don’t really add value technically, and they’re obviously ai. I’ve used this to translate technical docs into wording so management can say “look how we use ai”
  • ai coding is better. I use it through my ide as effectively an extension of autocomplete: where the IDE can autocomplete function signatures, for example, ai can autocomplete multiple lines. It’s very effective in that scenario
  • I’m just starting with more complex rulesets. I’ve gotten code reviews with good results, except for keeping me in the loop so it inevitably goes very wrong. I’ve really polished my git knowledge trying to unwind where someone trusts ai results without evaluation but the fails forward trying to get it to fix itself until they can’t find their way back. This past week I’ve been playing with a refactoring ruleset (copied from online). It’s finding some good opportunities and the verbal description of the fix is good, but I’ll need to tweak the rule set for the generated solution to be usable

The short version is it appears to be a useful tool, IFF you can spend the time to develop thorough rulesets, stables of mcp servers, and most importantly, the expertise that you could do it yourself

[–] Dumhuvud@programming.dev 5 points 16 hours ago

GenAI is a plagiarism machine. If you use it, you're complicit.

Ethics aside, LLMs in particular tend to "hallucinate". If you blindly trust their output, you're a dumbass. I honestly feel bad for young people who should be studying but are instead relying on ChatGPT and the likes.

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 1 points 13 hours ago (1 children)
[–] douglasg14b@lemmy.world 3 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

I mean there's effectively very capable text and conversation. Generators so powering NPCs is most definitely a strong suit for them.

Especially if you self-host some smaller models, you can effectively just do this on your own hardware for pretty cheap.

Having customizable dialogue per player that shifts the tone based off of players, actions, level gear or interactions with that NPC or other NPCs that that MPC is associated with is really cool.

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago

effectively just do this on your own hardware for pretty cheap.

Yeah I thought as much, but I'm no expert in the subject so I left the details for smarter people.

[–] Ryoae@piefed.social 8 points 1 day ago

I'm repeating myself by saying that, AI has a place. It is just not the be-all application to everything like it is being treated.

[–] CoffeeTails@lemmy.world 2 points 19 hours ago (2 children)

If it truly helps you, I think that might be enough for me. I say truly because you need to use an AI with responsibility to not ruin yourself. Like, don't let it think for you. Don't trust everything it says.

I use it a lot when applying for jobs, something I've struggled with on and off for 12 years. I suck and writing the cover letter and CV. It takes me 2-3 days to update a cover letter for a job because it takes so much energy. With AI that is down to 1-2 days.

It's also great for explaning things in other words of if you're trying to look up something that's hard to search for, I don't have any examples tho.

I used to use it to help me formulate scentences since english isn't my first language. Now I instead use Kagi Translate.

[–] Qzr@programming.dev 2 points 17 hours ago (3 children)

re: applying for jobs

Not criticizing your use to write your CV specifically.

But in general, I wonder where this arms race is going? Companies using AI to pre-filter applications, because they get too many. Applicants then using AI to write their CVs, because they have to apply so many times, because they automatically get rejected.

Basically in the end the entire process will be automated, and there won't be any human interaction anymore... just LLMs generating and choosing CVs. Maybe I'm too pessimistic, but that's the direction we're headed in imo.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago

We’re already there. You already read about people applying to hundreds of companies to get an offer

Even worse than the rejections are the fake jobs - typically a recruiter trying to build up a file of applicants by scamming you into applying for something that doesn’t exist.

The only part left to automate is the actual fuiding and applying. I’m lucky not having to apply for a bunch of years so maybe it has changed, but there never seemed to be a good way to automate finding the hundreds of openings and sending the application. Job application sites are determined to be middlemen but don’t actually seem to make the process more efficient

[–] CoffeeTails@lemmy.world 2 points 16 hours ago

It does feel like that sometimes! It's very sad that recruiting has lost the human touch. They seem to be blinded by years of experiences and checking boxes when they should recruit by personality, because a person can always learn. But you can't really do much about a shitty personality, exception if you see that spark underneath it all. Some people just needs a real chance and to be believed in.

A lot of recruiters don't even want the cover letter anymore, some have a few questions and some only go by the CV.

[–] yabbadabaddon@lemmy.zip 2 points 16 hours ago

As soon as the HR process started to use algorithms to filter out applications, it was open game to find any ways and tools to fuck their process over. Just my opinion.

[–] Apytele@sh.itjust.works 1 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah I use it to break up my ADHD monosentence paragraphs. I'll tell it to avoid changing my wording (it can add definitions if it thinks the word is super niche or archaic) but mostly break things up into more readable sentences and group / reorder sentences as needed for better conceptual flow. It's actually a pretty good low level editor.

[–] CoffeeTails@lemmy.world 1 points 17 hours ago

That's a great use!

[–] iceberg314@slrpnk.net -1 points 12 hours ago

I feel like self hosting LLMs and GenAi is slightly better for the environment, definitely less environmental impact than gaming.

It just these massive datacenters and models. If people can just be a little more patient and specialized with their AI usage it saves so much electricity

[–] goat@sh.itjust.works 1 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) (5 children)

It's as useful as a rubber duck. Decent at bouncing ideas off it when no one is available, or you can't be bothered to bother people about dumb ideas.

But at the moment, no, it's not justifiable as it directly fuels oligarchies, fascism in the US, and tech bros. Perhaps when the bubble pops.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Canopyflyer@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

LLM's have their use, there is no doubt about that. I'm in the middle of creating a home brew campaign for my D&D group and unfortunately I'm a lousy artist and I wanted a few things visualized. Well, I used a photo generating AI to create something that had the visual I wanted. I'm going to use it for my campaign and it will probably just sit on my hard drive after I'm done.

My employer is rolling out AI and is asking us to find places to insert it into our workflows. I am doing that with my team, but none of us are really sure if it will be of any benefit.

The problem right now is we're at the stage where idiots are convinced it is something that it is not and they have literally thrown 10's of billions of dollars at it. Now... They are staring at the wide abyss that is the amount of money they invested vs the amount of money people are willing to pay for it.

I've seen arguments for and against the presence of an AI bubble... Personally, I think it's a bubble that's so large that it will take down several long established computer industry manufacturers when if pops. Those that are arguing its absence probably have large investments that they do not want to see fail.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 23 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The best use of AI I've seen thus far is reading legislative bills. Those monstrosities are so fucking long and filled with earmarks that it's next to impossible to understand what is in them.

Having an AI not only read the bill but keep a watch of it as it goes through Congress is probably the best use of AI because it actually helps citizens.

I am on record saying we need an AI that can track prices of various things that can then predict when the best time it is to buy something.

I want an AI bot that saves me money or gets me a good deal or extracts money from the capital class.

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (7 children)

Except they can screw up at that role.

There's a lawsuit because DOGE asked ChatGPT to summarize projects DEI-ness, and for example it declared a grant for fixing air conditioning was a DEI initiative

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] tomiant@piefed.social 11 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)
  1. The sciences obviously

  2. For me personally, data collation

  3. Learning

  4. Assisting with Linux sysadmin stuff (used to be a "how do I X" meant hours of scouring online forums and asking questions that might be deleted because draconian forum rules or get answered weeks later if at all, now I can get shit done in minutes)

   5. I also use it a lot to explore ideas and arguments, like a sort of metaphysical sparring partner.

[–] Denjin@feddit.uk 23 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Medicine.

Evidence shows that some highly specialised models are better at things like detecting breast cancer in scans than human doctors.

Properly anonymised automatic second scans by an AI to catch the markers that human doctors miss for another review by a specialist is an excellent potential use case for an LLM AI.

Transcription services can save doctors huge amounts of admin time and allows them to focus on the patient if they know there's a reliable system in place for typing up notes for a consultation. As long as it's treated as a "please review these notes are accurate" rather than treated as a gospel recording and the data is destroyed once it's job is complete and the patient has been able to give informed consent.

The way these things are being used in actual medical contexts right now is frankly terrifying.

[–] Hossenfeffer@feddit.uk 16 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I had a colonoscopy last year (such fun!) and there was an 'AI' monitoring the camera feed to detect anomalies. If it spotted something it just drew the doctor's attention to it for his expert, human review. I was ok with that. Effectively an extra pair of eyes that can look everywhere on the screen all at once and never blink.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] yabbadabaddon@lemmy.zip 0 points 16 hours ago

It speeds up my dev time dramatically. I know what I want to do, I have an idea of how I want to do it. LLM generates boilerplate code I review. I tweak it. I fix the bug. If there is something I don't understand, I ask sources to review the output. I test it. Then I'll submit it for peer review once I'm happy with the code and the output.

[–] awmwrites@lemmy.cafe 32 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (19 children)

My current list of reasons why you shouldn't use generative AI/LLMs

A) because of the environmental impacts and massive amount of water used to cool data centers https://news.mit.edu/2025/explained-generative-ai-environmental-impact-0117

B) because of the negative impacts on the health and lives of people living near data centers https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy8gy7lv448o

C) because they're plagiarism machines that are incapable of creating anything new and are often wrong https://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/does-ai-limit-our-creativity/ https://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2024/06/20/why-ai-has-a-plagiarism-problem/

D) because using them negatively affects artists and creatives and their ability to maintain their livelihoods https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2713374523000316 https://www.insideradio.com/free/media-industry-continues-reshaping-workforce-in-2025-amid-digital-shift/article_403564f7-08ce-45a1-9366-a47923cd2c09.html

E) because people who use AI show significant cognitive impairments compared to people who don't https://www.media.mit.edu/publications/your-brain-on-chatgpt/ https://time.com/7295195/ai-chatgpt-google-learning-school/

F) because using them might break your brain and drive you to psychosis https://theweek.com/tech/spiralism-ai-religion-cult-chatbot https://mental.jmir.org/2025/1/e85799 https://youtu.be/VRjgNgJms3Q

G) because Zelda Williams asked you not to https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0r0erqk18jo https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-10-07/zelda-williams-calls-out-ai-video-of-late-father-robin-williams/105863964

H) because OpenAI is helping Trump bomb schools in Iran https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/columnist/2026/03/06/openai-pentagon-tech-surveillance-us-citizens/88983682007/

I) because RAM costs have skyrocketed because OpenAI has used money it doesn't have to purchase RAM from Nvidia that currently doesn't exist to stock data centers that also don't currently exist, inconveniencing everyone for what amounts to speculative construction https://www.theverge.com/news/839353/pc-ram-shortage-pricing-spike-news

J) because Sam Altman says that his endgame is to rent knowledge back to you at a cost https://gizmodo.com/sam-altman-says-intelligence-will-be-a-utility-and-hes-just-the-man-to-collect-the-bills-2000732953

K) because some AI bro is going to totally ignore all of this and ask an LLM to write a rebuttal rather than read any of it.

[–] jimmy90@lemmy.world 1 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

i use it like a search engine or example generator

i don't trust anything it creates just like i don't trust anything on the internet without validating it

i take you point about being wasteful tho, AI is like the oil of computing; incredibly wasteful for what it does

[–] veroxii@aussie.zone 1 points 15 hours ago

I think costs will come down. Computers used to take up an entire room. Now I'm typing this reply on a pocket sized device which would seem like a super computer to people from the early 80s

load more comments (18 replies)
[–] Pinetten@pawb.social 11 points 1 day ago (4 children)

I think anything with text generation is fine. Your multiple Google searches are highly likely to eat more resources than that. Also, fuck Google, use Ecosia. But when I suspect an answer isn't one quick search away, I happily rather use Le Chat for answers, than give Reddit traffic, or have to wade through the shite that is Fandom, Wikia or whatever. Not to mention using AI helps me get past the issue of having to check multiple sites for an answer, just to find that the answer is "Google it" or "Nvm, solved it". Some of you fuckers did this.

However people need to understand that an AI is exactly as fallible as any person. Yes, it has access and capability to handle way more data but between trying to please you and just it getting it's wires crossed, it's going to make mistakes. YOU need to be able to assess the accuracy of the output. The more important the topic, the more careful you need to be and always assume that the possibility of error is there no matter how hard you try - JUST LIKE WITH ANY BIT OF INFORMATION. I see so many people cite academic articles like they prove whatever claim they are making, just to see that the study in question was funded by The Company That Wants to Prove The Claim and sample size was 3 people who work for The Company That Wants to Prove The Claim. At least AI has a small chance of pointing the issue out if YOU yourself tell it to be critical - and I actually suspect this is part of the reason some people hate AI. They don't like that it absolutely can be more intellectually rigorous than a person with an emotional investment in whatever they want to be true. Yes, you can have an AI asspat your grandest delusions but if you actually try to get it to be critical, it will be. You can use a hammer to hit people, or you can use it on a nail as intended (and how many times you hit your own fingers is on you, not the hammer).

I would draw a line on artwork, videos, music. While I'm not going to crucify actual artists using AI assistance to take out some tedium from a project, I still wouldn't encourage it. Stolen artwork to train AI is one thing and the environmental impact is VASTLY greater than just text. Generating one AI image can use as much energy as even a 1,000 text responses. I would also really like to be able to completely opt out of AI slop in media sites. I fucking hate that Soundcloud allows it.

And a last point on AI text responses: if you saw the rise of alt-right and the anti-vaxx stuff, you probably are familiar with gish galloping and Brandolini's Law. If not, you really fucking should be. AI can make it so much easier to debunk misinformation. YES it can make it easier to perpetuate too but this is where we see the AI weapons race. Bad actors can AND WILL use AI to fill any void with their rhetoric. If you value truth and facts and want to prevent misinformation from spreading you are gimping yourself if you're not using AI.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] fork@feddit.online 5 points 1 day ago (3 children)

It's never justifiable because it can and will output incorrect information. It's made my job worse because it means confidently incorrect people bug me when it's wrong and I have to explain why it's wrong.

[–] MerryJaneDoe@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Human beings have been outputting incorrect information for years. Get a high school textbook in literally any subject (except possibly math) from the 1970s. You'll be amazed at how much of it is oversimplified or politicized or just plain wrong.

I do agree that AI has compounded the problem. There's a limit to how much inaccuracy/incompetence a given system can tolerate. An organization that relies on AI for critical processes better have a way to monitor and intervene.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Anbalsilfer@lemmy.ml 14 points 1 day ago (3 children)

I have autism and ADHD, and have been frustrated throughout my entire life by my inability to realize any of my numerous ideas due to double executive dysfunction. While I see many drawbacks from using these models - the most serious one as it currently stands being their water consumption - I've come to consider them a very important support tool for people in a similar position as myself.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›