Artificial intelligence may be marketed as society's great equalizer—transforming businesses, streamlining work and making life easier for all—but for many marginalized Americans, AI doesn't feel like a promise.
    • tiredofsametab@fedia.io
      9·
      4 天前

      We have a lot of non-management whom are all-in and drinking the kool-ade. I’m still highly put off for a number of reasons, but an outlier.

  • Xulai@mander.xyzEnglish
    34·
    4 天前

    Proper headline:

    “Intelligent People Understand the Limits and Dangers of AI; Unfortunately AI Company Leaders Do Not, and Seek to Silence Opposition”

  • magnetosphere@fedia.io
    32·
    4 天前

    I don’t blame them for being skeptical. Anything that corporations/rich people are enthusiastic about usually ends up screwing them.

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      4·
      3 天前

      A certain amount of skepticism is healthy, but it’s also quite common for people to go overboard and completely avoid a useful thing just because some rich idiot is pushing it. I’ve seen a lot of misinformation here on Lemmy about LLMs because people hate the environment its in (layoffs in the name of replacing people with “AI”), but they completely ignore the merit the tech has (great at summarizing and providing decent results from vague queries). If used properly, LLMs can be quite useful, but people hyper-focus on the negatives, probably because they hate the marketing material and the exceptional cases the news is great at shining a spotlight on.

      I also am skeptical about LLMs usefulness, but I also find them useful in some narrow use-cases I have at work. It’s not going to actually replace any of my coworkers anytime soon, but it does help me be a bit more productive since it’s yet another option to get me unstuck when I hit a wall.

      Just because there’s something bad about something doesn’t make the tech useless. If something gets a ton of funding, there’s probably some merit to it, so turn your skepticism into a healthy quest for truth and maybe you’ll figure out how to benefit from it.

      For example, the hype around cryptocurrency makes it easy to knee-jerk reject the technology outright, because it looks like it’s merely a tool to scam people out of their money. That is partially true, but it’s also a tool to make anonymous transactions feasible. Yes, there are scammers out there pushing worthless coins in a pump and dump scheme, but there are also privacy-focused coins (Monero, Z-Cash, etc) that are being used today to help fund activists operating under repressive regimes. It’s also used by people doing illegal things, but hey, so is cash, and privacy coins are basically easier to use cash. We probably wouldn’t have had those w/o Bitcoin, though they use very different technology under the hood to achieve their aims. Maybe they’re not for you, but they do help people.

      Instead of focusing on the bad of a new technology, more people should focus on the good, and then weigh for themselves whether the good is worth the bad. I think in many cases it is, but only if people are sufficiently informed about how to use them to their advantage.

  • OpenPassageways@programming.devEnglish
    71·
    3 天前

    As skeptical as I am, I’m feeling pressure to join the BS train on this. It’s literally all over LinkedIn… Even though I’m sure it’s all mostly bullshit, it doesn’t matter that I think. What matters is that this is where billionaires are dumping their money so I need to be in a position to get some of it or I may not be able to be gainfully employed in 10 years.

    • remotelove@lemmy.caEnglish
      14·
      4 天前

      In this study, we conducted a survey (n = 742) including a representative U.S. sample and an oversample of gender minorities, racial minorities, and disabled individuals to examine how demographic factors shape AI attitudes.

      • JohnnyFlapHoleSeed@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        3 天前

        Thanks for the actual response. Personally I think you sample size is way too low, and the selection is skewed towards people that already feel marginalized, which will in turn, skew your results

        • remotelove@lemmy.caEnglish
          1·
          3 天前

          I looked into that and the only question I really have is how geographically distributed the samples were. Other than that, It was an oversampled study, so <50% of the people were the control, of sorts. I don’t fully understand how the sampling worked, but there is a substantial chart at the bottom of the study that shows the full distribution of responses. Even with under 1000 people, it seems legit.

  • SunshineJogger@feddit.orgEnglish
    46·
    4 天前

    I use AI daily and find it useful as a tool. Its also frustrating in its current state. The disgusting default buttlick responses, trying to please the user with fake polite drool. And then the many, many mistakes.

    And it’s a new tool, so yea it need to ripen…

    And that means to go all in on a company strategic level of AI as a technology is dumb.

    When building a product the problem the product solves is to be the center of the work. Not the technology used to achieve the solution.

    • Olap@lemmy.worldEnglish
      121·
      4 天前

      I’ve got some bad news for you. They will never fix the mistakes as it cannot reason, it has no actual intelligence. LLMs are already plateauing and are miles away from being trustworthy. And they steal copyrighted work every request

      • thedruid@lemmy.worldEnglish
        12·
        4 天前

        There it is. Reason. Machines can’t reason. Not one. They can fake it. They can mimic. But they cannot reason and never will