this post was submitted on 28 Jun 2026
220 points (96.2% liked)

Technology

85870 readers
3610 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 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 37 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] muusemuuse@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago

This is exactly why we don’t have government paying for health care. They have no incentive to be responsible for the health problems they cause.

[–] lemmelemmy@feddit.org 2 points 1 day ago

When would the charade going to end?

[–] BozzyBuzzard@lemmy.zip 5 points 1 day ago

Isn't that the CSAM chatbot? I fucking hate it here.

[–] roofuskit@lemmy.world 72 points 3 days ago (2 children)

So vital it helped the US lose a war.

[–] rozodru@piefed.world 30 points 3 days ago

even in times of war, LLMs will hallucinate. "you're right, that was the wrong target (one line) here's what you did wrong (with detail)"

[–] Siegfried@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

A broken clock and bla bla

[–] Photonic@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

A broken… Grok?

[–] Dyskolos@lemmy.zip 41 points 3 days ago (2 children)

the Department of War used Grok to “deploy over 2,000 munitions to 2,000 distinct targets within 96 hours during Operation Epic Fury.”

Let that euphemism sink in for a second.

[–] errer@lemmy.world 21 points 3 days ago (1 children)

And only 2,000 children were slaughtered! Thanks (cough cough cough) Grok!

[–] Dyskolos@lemmy.zip 5 points 2 days ago

NAH-AH! It were "2000 distinct targets". But hey, the use of euphemism at least show they KNOW. That has to count for something, hm?

[–] BremboTheFourth@piefed.ca 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I wonder if Grok is also the justification they'll start using for claiming that random fishing boats in the Pacific are actually drug runners

[–] Dyskolos@lemmy.zip 6 points 2 days ago

It surely is an easy justification. It was not in their hands, how could grok fail them, it was a slight miscalculation that was already fixed, blahblahblah

[–] sprigatito@lemmy.zip 37 points 3 days ago (2 children)

What's even the point of exempting something like a military base, like the article says.

Or exempting Grok from pollution regulations.

Like that's just backwards. Let's increase national security, by exposing residents to harmful toxins.

At that point you're just doing the work of foreign adversaries, by killing citizens yourself.

[–] Solrac@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

Quintessential USA move right there, almost fundamental.

[–] Flower@sh.itjust.works 11 points 3 days ago (1 children)

At that point you’re just doing the work of foreign adversaries, by killing citizens yourself.

That's a common reason the big ones in history fall. In the end it's by the rich, for the rich, and f the citizens. A population strongly divided doesn't unite in time against an external enemy and the enemy wins. So far they're just following history's playbook.

[–] Serinus@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

I would like off Commodus's wild ride. Thanks in advance.

[–] Bumpi@piefed.social 16 points 2 days ago

Grok = trained on redneck X tweets = provides redneck answers.

[–] melsaskca@lemmy.ca 7 points 3 days ago

DOJ: "We'll say it for 100 million dollars."

[–] Anonymous_Leaker@lemmy.world 6 points 3 days ago (3 children)

He says ai will be a million times smarter than a human.

[–] Mondez 12 points 3 days ago (2 children)

One day an AI might be, it won't be an LLM though.

[–] TheRealKuni@piefed.social 8 points 3 days ago (1 children)

One day an AI might be, it won't be an LLM though.

I’m no expert, but I feel like that’s akin to saying a human may be intelligent, but it won’t be Broca’s area of the brain.

I would think a true AGI would involve a lot of different neural networks doing different things. And an LLM could end up being a useful component of allowing it to communicate. Though who knows how the model would need to change if its language prompts are inputs from other neural nets.

And I have to imagine at this point major AI models aren’t just LLMs, that’s just the part we interface with.

Again, I’m very far from an expert. What I do know is that the current MASSIVE push with the technically we have now is causing more harm than it’s worth.

[–] Mondez 9 points 3 days ago

Brocas area on its own isn't intelligent and strapping a bunch of Brocas areas together won't get you there either.

Most of the frontier models as far as I'm aware are basically a bunch of differently trained LLMs strapped together and even then there have only been incremental improvements to their performance, no new functionality has really emerged from doing that.

LLM investment is IMO a dead end hype train and will require breakthroughs in other techniques of machine learning to put together something we would recognise as truly intelligent. I'll concede the possibility that LLM like functionality may be a portion of that but equally it may not be.

[–] Anonymous_Leaker@lemmy.world -4 points 3 days ago (1 children)
[–] rozodru@piefed.world 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

well it's true. if you don't get an hallucination or a false positive solution on your first attempt with any LLM you should go play the lottery.

[–] Dyskolos@lemmy.zip 5 points 3 days ago (2 children)

It might be a million times faster, but not smarter.

[–] AlligatorBlizzard@sh.itjust.works 6 points 3 days ago (1 children)

a human

It's a million times smarter than a specific human, Musk's pedo buddy Donald Trump.

[–] Dyskolos@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 days ago

Yeah ok, there surely are exceptions :-)

[–] abbadon420@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Depends how you define smart. Can it answer any kind of encycclopedic question within seconds? Yes!

Can it adapt and change to a dynamic environment? Not really!

[–] MadMadBunny@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 days ago

That’s not being smart? That’s having good memory recall.

[–] Anonymous_Leaker@lemmy.world -2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Yes, just says ai is a broad statement. I mean robots with ai minds. I am talking about further down the line.