im new to lemmy and i wanna know your perspective about ai
I support running or using AI locally since it’s privacy respecting and doesn’t damage environment since the Local AI uses energy to function from the device which it’s running on locally. But in terms of other AI, nope.
I strongly dislike how LLMs are inserted everywhere.
But LLMs are just one kind of AI and I’m not going to stop using the kinds that actually are useful and appropriate.
AI is a tool. A Glock 9mm is a tool. A paintbrush is a tool.
Tools are only as good, or as harmful, as their users. If AI is being used to flood the internet with slop, that is a human decision. The fact that AI was used to generate the slop does not taint the AI itself in any meaningful way. On this platform, however, it is fashionable to hate AI.
The people who hate it here are either bad actors or have no real understanding of what AI is, what it does, or what it is for.
This is pretty close to how I think about it. AI (notably not generative) that was developed to sort bread and now is reprogrammed to detect cancer cells: Fantastic. Generative AI to search and cite multiple interacting manuals with thousands of pages each: probably ok with significant guardrails. Generative AI that drives up local electricity costs so someone can see their underage neighbor with 4 boobs: terrible. To extend your metaphor it’s like handing a glock to a toddler.
Why or how a gun is a tool?
It’s a tool for killing people.
That’s not a good or reasonable purpose for a tool, sure, but it doesn’t make it less of a tool, it just makes it morally abhorrent.
A tool is any human-designed object that extends our ability to perform a task. That is the functional definition. Moral weight does not enter into the classification. By that definition, a gun is unambiguously a tool. A gun is engineered to apply controlled force at a distance. Humans use it for specific purposes: hunting animals for food, self-defense, deterrence, sport shooting, and as an instrument of the state via military and law enforcement. In every case, intent, judgment, and responsibility reside entirely with the human operator. The object itself has no agency, will, or decision-making capability. People often confuse what a tool can be used for with what a tool is. That confusion leads to emotional objections rather than logical ones. A scalpel cuts flesh. A chainsaw destroys wood. A nail gun can kill a person. None of those facts remove them from the category of “tool.” Harm potential does not negate tool status; it simply increases the responsibility of the user. This is directly analogous to AI. AI applies computation. A paintbrush applies pigment. A gun applies force. Different domains, same underlying principle: they are instruments that amplify human capability. If someone uses AI to generate spam, or a gun to commit violence, the fault lies with the human actor, not the instrument. If we redefine “tool” to exclude objects we are uncomfortable with, the definition collapses into incoherence. The correct framework is not to anthropomorphize tools, but to hold users accountable for how they are employed. That is why a gun is a tool, not philosophically, but functionally and unambiguously.
I see that you are okay with that as long it fits by definition, regardless the harm that some tools can cause. Thanks god U.S. abolished slavery. Cheers.
Not to his face.
It.wouldve.been interesting to see AI before social media. Right now it feels like an extension of social media.
I wouldn’t call anything a clanker because I’m not a Boomer
It’s hot garbage and people who use it to create images/music are the polar opposite of artists.
A fascinating tool with a lot of potential, but sadly is being used right now to feed a greed machine.
He is what he chooses to be.
Wasn’t he an alien?
He’s one of the good ones!!!
Wait…
I am not inherently against “AI”. I am against LLM’s because they are both an ecological disaster and a social disaster.
Average user here thinks AI is synonymous with LLMs and that it’s not only not intelligent but also bad for the environment, immoral to use because it’s trained on copyrighted content, a total job-killer that’s going to leave everyone unemployed, soulless slop that can’t create real art or writing, and basically just a lazy cheat for people who lack actual talent or skills.
And that’s a good thing.
It’s not just that that’s what the average person thinks, but that’s really the only kind of AI they’re likely to come in direct contact with or is the kind being applied to systems that are directly undermining their lives.
ML has been used for over a decade now in things like cyber security for behavioral analysis and EDR (Endpoint Detection and Response) systems. I’ve helped a friend use SLEAP, which analyzes specifically formatted videos of animals to catalog interactions over dozens of hours of footage instead of needing to manually scrub it. In these ways, the serious scientist/engineer does not care what the average person thinks of AI, it has no bearing on the functioning of these systems or the work they perform. The only people that care about the sentiment of the average person are the people that need to keep the hype train going for their product valuations to which I have nothing to say but a full-throated, “Fuck 'em”
Don’t forget the psychosis and other mental impact.
And they’re right about all of that except the AI equals LLMs thing, but that’s forgivable because the LLM hustlers have managed to make the terms synonymous in most people’s minds through a massive marketing effort.
I would say they are right in that what companies are currently selling as AI is mostly just LLM or machine learning. We don’t have true intelligence. The separation is between what AI did mean in the past before the hype train tried to sell the current snake oil.
Naw, he a homie. He a real clanka.
Only talentless losers make A.I. “art.”
