I’ve noticed an uptick in the number of pro-AI posts on this platform.

Various posts with titles similar to “When will people stop being afraid of AI” or “Can we please acknowledge AI was very needed for X

Can’t tell if its the propaganda machine invading, or annoying teenage tech-bros who are detached from reality.

  • Bazoogle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Honestly, the problem when talking about “AI” is how many different things that can mean.

    • General AI chats
    • Coding agents
    • Automated pentesting/vulnerability discovery
    • Image/video/music generation
    • Grammar checking
    • Automated support agents (phone or chat)
    • Autonomous weaponry

    and so many more. Being Pro-AI could mean you like one or two application of the AI, but be against it in the others. I know very few people that like it for the use of media generation. However, there have been a lot of long time vulnerabilities in very popular open source projects that was only just discovered. That seems like a pretty undeniable use case demonstrating its usefulness.

    Then of course there’s governments that want to get their greedy blood thirsty hands on it to create autonomous weaponry. So now if you try to defend AI for a use case like defensively finding program vulnerabilities you somehow also have to defend AI weaponry?

    For a generic AI model, it is very powerful and can either be used to grow yourself or abused so your brain doesn’t have to work at all. You can use AI to do the hard work for you, or use it as a personal tutor to guide you into what to learn. People will of course mention hallucinations as why it can’t be used to learn, but you don’t have to take AI at its words. If you were to ask it to create a lesson plan on what you should study for a subject, in what order, and resources are available, you can do all of the actual learning using content the AI has no control over. So what you do with that is going to be up to the person, and opinions on it are going to vary wildly.

    Some people argue any use case is not okay given the various concerns of energy and water usage, and where those models sourced their training data. Not to mention if you support AI you must be supporting the AI companies. I agree there are concerns for the environmental impact, and the training data discussion is a long one on its own. However, I do think you can support AI as a technology, and not be okay with the way the technology is being done in regards to environmental impact. And given AI can be done on a local machine, I don’t think it has to be tied at all with the big tech at all.

    “AI” is such a wide and immense topic. And what we talk about with AI today will not be relevant come next year with how quickly it is developing. We shall see if some form of Moore’s law applied with the growth of AI as far as efficiency and quality of the AI goes.

    • clif@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      53 minutes ago

      One of the first things I say when non tech people ask me about ““AI”” is :

      “The term AI here is just marketing wank”