Ask Lemmy

I want everyone to realize that the only reason AI seems intelligent is because it speaks English.

get rid of it, nobody wants it or needs it, and should only be offered as a service to niche industries. phones, places like youtube do not need the slop. its not ready for medical screening/scans, as it can easily make mistakes.

I'm not against AI itself—it's the hype and misinformation that frustrate me. LLMs aren't true AI - or not AGI as the meaning of AI has drifted - but they've been branded that way to fuel tech and stock market bubbles. While LLMs can be useful, they're still early-stage software, causing harm through misinformation and widespread copyright issues. They're being misapplied to tasks like search, leading to poor results and damaging the reputation of AI.

Real AI lies in advanced neural networks, which are still a long way off. I wish tech companies would stop misleading the public, but the bubble will burst eventually—though not before doing considerable harm.

Most importantly, I wish countries would start giving a damn about the extreme power consumption caused by AI and regulate the hell out of it. Why do we need to lower our monitors refresh rate while there is a ton of energy used by useless AI agents instead that we should get rid of?

License it's usage

I think two main things need to happen: increased transparency from AI companies, and limits on use of training data.

In regards to transparency, a lot of current AI companies hide information about how their models are designed, produced, weighted and use. This causes, in my opinion, many of the worst effects of current AI. Lack of transparency around training methods mean we don't know how much power AI training uses. Lack of transparency in training data makes it easier for the companies to hide their piracy. Lack of transparency in weighting and use means that many of the big AI companies can abuse their position to push agendas, such as Elon Musk's manipulation of Grok, and the CCP's use of DeepSeek. Hell, if issues like these were more visible, its entirely possible AI companies wouldn't have as much investment, and thus power as they do now.

In terms of limits on training data, I think a lot of the backlash to it is over-exaggerated. AI basically takes sources and averages them. While there is little creativity, the work is derivative and bland, not a direct copy. That said, if the works used for training were pirated, as many were, there obviously needs to be action taken. Similarly, there needs to be some way for artists to protect or sell their work. From my understanding, they technically have the legal means to do so, but as it stands, enforcement is effectively impossible and non-existant.

I'm beyond the idea that there could or would be any worldwide movement against Ai, or much of anything if we're comparing healthcare, welfare and education reform. People are tuned out and numb.

A breakthrough in AI Alignment reaserch.

Ban it until the hard problem of consciousness is solved.