Not really. The output of LLMs is massively increased global warming, increased prices of goods and services, decreased number of jobs, increased numbers of bugs in software, massive increase in wealth migration from poor to the rich, and increased surveillance. None of that has to do with the quality of the users. Just using it at all results in all of those things.
Like any tool, the user plays a key role in the quality of the output.
Not really. The output of LLMs is massively increased global warming, increased prices of goods and services, decreased number of jobs, increased numbers of bugs in software, massive increase in wealth migration from poor to the rich, and increased surveillance. None of that has to do with the quality of the users. Just using it at all results in all of those things.
You’re confused, those things are the outputs out late-stage capitalism.
Yeah but it’s also just kind of a shitty tool.
Thats a take, but if you pair that sentiment with what I just said it paints a funny picture.
Like if I went to the store and bought a cheap hammer and it breaks after a few swings it’s a shitty tool. No matter my expertise with said tool.
That analogy only works if the AI literally stops functioning after a few uses.
A better comparison would be a tool that performs badly when used for the wrong job or by someone who doesn’t know its limitations.
“Sometimes produces bad output” isn’t the same thing as “shitty tool.”
Which just feeds back into what I’ve already said. Shall we go around again?