Skip to content
  • Hjem
  • Seneste
  • Etiketter
  • Populære
  • Verden
  • Bruger
  • Grupper
Temaer
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Kollaps
FARVEL BIG TECH
  1. Forside
  2. Ikke-kategoriseret
  3. "AI" is a failed technology, in the sense that it's neither fit for purpose, nor a likely path to its stated end goal of "AGI", but a lot of people's profits currently depend on pretending it's not.

"AI" is a failed technology, in the sense that it's neither fit for purpose, nor a likely path to its stated end goal of "AGI", but a lot of people's profits currently depend on pretending it's not.

Planlagt Fastgjort Låst Flyttet Ikke-kategoriseret
269 Indlæg 121 Posters 9 Visninger
  • Ældste til nyeste
  • Nyeste til ældste
  • Most Votes
Svar
  • Svar som emne
Login for at svare
Denne tråd er blevet slettet. Kun brugere med emne behandlings privilegier kan se den.
  • skavish@welley.socialS skavish@welley.social

    if you’ve never used it, then yes, you’re not in a position to judge what it looks like when used properly. being an experienced engineer and maintainer gives you plenty of expertise in software engineering, but it doesn’t magically give you first-hand experience with a tool you explicitly said you’ve never used.

    you can absolutely argue that you don’t want to use it. that’s a different claim.

    reflex@retrogaming.socialR This user is from outside of this forum
    reflex@retrogaming.socialR This user is from outside of this forum
    reflex@retrogaming.social
    wrote sidst redigeret af
    #223

    @skavish @Gargron They are using it at my job and it absolutely is spaghetti code harming the quality of our product and our devs brains.

    While human code certainly can be bad, it's rarely as confusing. And unlike AI, humans can learn best practices and improve over time.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • gargron@mastodon.socialG gargron@mastodon.social

      "AI" is a failed technology, in the sense that it's neither fit for purpose, nor a likely path to its stated end goal of "AGI", but a lot of people's profits currently depend on pretending it's not. I am curious to see how long the hype will last once the Nvidia ouroboros ends and money stops being pumped into marketing.

      mike@thecanadian.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
      mike@thecanadian.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
      mike@thecanadian.social
      wrote sidst redigeret af
      #224

      @Gargron I have to respectfully disagree even though I know I'll be pilloried for it. Economically yes there's a huge bubble around the tech but it's far from failed. Right now there are thousands of small businesses and individuals doing so many creative things with both local and inexpensive hosted models. We're just scratching the surface of what will come for better or worse, but failed? No. Democratized coding yes. Where that leads is up to us.

      evdelen@mstdn.caE 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • mike@thecanadian.socialM mike@thecanadian.social

        @Gargron I have to respectfully disagree even though I know I'll be pilloried for it. Economically yes there's a huge bubble around the tech but it's far from failed. Right now there are thousands of small businesses and individuals doing so many creative things with both local and inexpensive hosted models. We're just scratching the surface of what will come for better or worse, but failed? No. Democratized coding yes. Where that leads is up to us.

        evdelen@mstdn.caE This user is from outside of this forum
        evdelen@mstdn.caE This user is from outside of this forum
        evdelen@mstdn.ca
        wrote sidst redigeret af
        #225

        @mike @Gargron

        I'd say it's "failed" in that there is no way it can live up to the level of hype that the Tech Bro's have made around it, but yes, there is a limited place for it.

        CGI existed before this, it will continue to exist albeit augmented.

        Machine Generated Art & Text existed before this, it will continue to exist albeit augmented.

        Machine Learning existed before this and will continue too.

        The annoying things is that all of this has been subsumed into the morass that is "AI": a technology which is not delivering what was promised.

        I think people in the know need to revert to the old terms specifically because it displays an actual understanding of the tech behind the promise.

        As it is, anyone that says "AI" to me when what they really mean is "ML" of "CG" etc. (particularly the ones that should know better) doesn't get my full attention or the benefit of the doubt from me.

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • skavish@welley.socialS skavish@welley.social

          if you’ve never used it, then yes, you’re not in a position to judge what it looks like when used properly. being an experienced engineer and maintainer gives you plenty of expertise in software engineering, but it doesn’t magically give you first-hand experience with a tool you explicitly said you’ve never used.

          you can absolutely argue that you don’t want to use it. that’s a different claim.

          atax1a@infosec.exchangeA This user is from outside of this forum
          atax1a@infosec.exchangeA This user is from outside of this forum
          atax1a@infosec.exchange
          wrote sidst redigeret af
          #226

          @skavish "you have to step on rakes or else you can't say that stepping on rakes is a bad idea" ass response here

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • luminous_j@beige.partyL luminous_j@beige.party

            @Gargron That's a quite strong stance, that missed proper argumentation. I agree it's not perfect and it has risks, but 'failed"?What is your definition for 'failed'?

            Is it the fact that radiologists now can better diagnose breast cancer using AI as a tool to diagnose than without?

            Or Is it the fact that it immensely progressed mRNA technology?

            Or perhaps is it your fear for a 'new technology' that's alien and could perhaps take over your job and eventually your life?

            mathew@universeodon.comM This user is from outside of this forum
            mathew@universeodon.comM This user is from outside of this forum
            mathew@universeodon.com
            wrote sidst redigeret af
            #227

            @Luminous_J @Gargron « This large-scale study examined the heterogeneous effects of AI assistance on 140 radiologists across 15 chest X-ray diagnostic tasks and identified predictors of these effects. Surprisingly, conventional experience-based factors, such as years of experience, subspecialty and familiarity with AI tools, fail to reliably predict the impact of AI assistance. Additionally, lower-performing radiologists do not consistently benefit more from AI assistance, challenging prevailing assumptions. Instead, we found that the occurrence of AI errors strongly influences treatment outcomes, with inaccurate AI predictions adversely affecting radiologist performance on the aggregate of all pathologies and on half of the individual pathologies investigated. »

            https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-024-02850-w

            And that's ignoring the deskilling issues found with other medical professionals.

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • skavish@welley.socialS skavish@welley.social

              frankly, i do not give a shit about big corps with shitty management. AI is a massive multiplier for me and my team. if some incompetent corporate fucks manage to use it to create a mountain of shit, that is their problem. let them burn.

              joeinwynnewood@mstdn.socialJ This user is from outside of this forum
              joeinwynnewood@mstdn.socialJ This user is from outside of this forum
              joeinwynnewood@mstdn.social
              wrote sidst redigeret af
              #228

              @skavish

              I'm tossing this in as another intrinsic aspect of LLM code.

              "We demonstrate that hallucinations stem from the fundamental mathematical and logical structure of LLMs. Therefore, eliminating them through architectural improvements, dataset enhancements, or fact-checking mechanisms is impossible."

              When people make mistakes, they're almost always mistakes we've seen before. LLM hallucinations? Unlikely.

              LLMs Will Always Hallucinate, and We Need to Live with This
              https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-031-99965-9_39

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • waltbaldwin@mastodon.energyW waltbaldwin@mastodon.energy

                @Gargron @mellowfish

                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3TNpOD6bov8

                bmoreinis@journa.hostB This user is from outside of this forum
                bmoreinis@journa.hostB This user is from outside of this forum
                bmoreinis@journa.host
                wrote sidst redigeret af
                #229

                @waltbaldwin @Gargron @mellowfish Great piece, loved it. But much of that was written by AI! I feel duped.

                waltbaldwin@mastodon.energyW 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • bmoreinis@journa.hostB bmoreinis@journa.host

                  @waltbaldwin @Gargron @mellowfish Great piece, loved it. But much of that was written by AI! I feel duped.

                  waltbaldwin@mastodon.energyW This user is from outside of this forum
                  waltbaldwin@mastodon.energyW This user is from outside of this forum
                  waltbaldwin@mastodon.energy
                  wrote sidst redigeret af
                  #230

                  @bmoreinis @Gargron @mellowfish

                  lol, the irony is thick. gotta love the credits at the end. ...and the bod turning into ai, and brads password, and ...

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • gargron@mastodon.socialG gargron@mastodon.social

                    "AI" is a failed technology, in the sense that it's neither fit for purpose, nor a likely path to its stated end goal of "AGI", but a lot of people's profits currently depend on pretending it's not. I am curious to see how long the hype will last once the Nvidia ouroboros ends and money stops being pumped into marketing.

                    bredroll@mas.toB This user is from outside of this forum
                    bredroll@mas.toB This user is from outside of this forum
                    bredroll@mas.to
                    wrote sidst redigeret af
                    #231

                    @Gargron i think it's more true to say that its a failed product based on lies, theft and corruption, the mathematics of the technology is not the problem, the lawlessness, lack of regulation and profound disinformation and psychological damage are both signs of our failure to regulate the fascists and narcissistic tech bros

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • dodothedev@front-end.socialD dodothedev@front-end.social

                      @Gargron
                      I totally agree. What I also dislike is renaming things with "AI" just to make it sound advanced.

                      I heard an advert today for British Telecom saying their "AI business tool" could help your small business. That "tool" was booking tables (that's a CMS/database, not AI) and answering calls (that's an answering machine (at a push, IVR), not AI) etc.

                      weirdwriter@caneandable.socialW This user is from outside of this forum
                      weirdwriter@caneandable.socialW This user is from outside of this forum
                      weirdwriter@caneandable.social
                      wrote sidst redigeret af
                      #232

                      Same! And similar, https://sightlessscribbles.com/posts/a-thermodynamic-failure-of-the-soul/ @DodoTheDev @Gargron

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • mellowfish@ruby.socialM mellowfish@ruby.social

                        @Gargron counterpoint: we are well past the point of no return for agentic engineering. There will always be purists who insist on writing code by hand but we aren’t returning to that being the default even after the bubble pops. And I think quiet use of AI as glue will propagate more or less unseen through a lot of tech until it is the expected/desired thing vs a bolted-on buzzword.

                        Are there myriad problems with both of these? Of course. But that much is not “failure” in any meaningful sense.

                        bredroll@mas.toB This user is from outside of this forum
                        bredroll@mas.toB This user is from outside of this forum
                        bredroll@mas.to
                        wrote sidst redigeret af
                        #233

                        @mellowfish @Gargron "agentic" engineering is only effective if you place no weight on the risks of mistakes

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • gargron@mastodon.socialG gargron@mastodon.social

                          "AI" is a failed technology, in the sense that it's neither fit for purpose, nor a likely path to its stated end goal of "AGI", but a lot of people's profits currently depend on pretending it's not. I am curious to see how long the hype will last once the Nvidia ouroboros ends and money stops being pumped into marketing.

                          fcbsd@hachyderm.ioF This user is from outside of this forum
                          fcbsd@hachyderm.ioF This user is from outside of this forum
                          fcbsd@hachyderm.io
                          wrote sidst redigeret af
                          #234

                          @Gargron and oracle wishes it hadn't burnt all it's cash last october...

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • shally@mastodon.socialS shally@mastodon.social

                            @Gargron jepp we will see what is going to happen with this AI stuff. Everyone IT related knows what is going to be happening.

                            The entire world knows it. As we say in Germany "lasse komme".

                            🤗 😂

                            sanzky@masto.esS This user is from outside of this forum
                            sanzky@masto.esS This user is from outside of this forum
                            sanzky@masto.es
                            wrote sidst redigeret af
                            #235

                            @Shally @Gargron I don’t think the entire IT industry agrees on it. I feel the issue is quite divisive. I see it even on my work but also in socials.

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • mellowfish@ruby.socialM mellowfish@ruby.social

                              @Gargron counterpoint: we are well past the point of no return for agentic engineering. There will always be purists who insist on writing code by hand but we aren’t returning to that being the default even after the bubble pops. And I think quiet use of AI as glue will propagate more or less unseen through a lot of tech until it is the expected/desired thing vs a bolted-on buzzword.

                              Are there myriad problems with both of these? Of course. But that much is not “failure” in any meaningful sense.

                              kir@mastodon.unoK This user is from outside of this forum
                              kir@mastodon.unoK This user is from outside of this forum
                              kir@mastodon.uno
                              wrote sidst redigeret af
                              #236

                              @mellowfish @Gargron

                              Let's see when subsidize usage stops and tokens start costing 10x.

                              Also, if your prediction is right, then software is doomed.

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • gargron@mastodon.socialG gargron@mastodon.social

                                "AI" is a failed technology, in the sense that it's neither fit for purpose, nor a likely path to its stated end goal of "AGI", but a lot of people's profits currently depend on pretending it's not. I am curious to see how long the hype will last once the Nvidia ouroboros ends and money stops being pumped into marketing.

                                bison@mastodon.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
                                bison@mastodon.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
                                bison@mastodon.social
                                wrote sidst redigeret af
                                #237

                                @Gargron (just leaving this here as support and contrast to the AI bros losing their sht ^^")

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • skavish@welley.socialS skavish@welley.social

                                  @clayote you are confusing two arguments. I am not claiming Gargron would get good results, I am saying you cant know what results you'd get without actually using the tools. I use them daily to build real software, so I have firsthand experience. you keep demanding evidence while dismissing the possibility of evidence you haven't personally examined. the irony is hard to miss.

                                  kir@mastodon.unoK This user is from outside of this forum
                                  kir@mastodon.unoK This user is from outside of this forum
                                  kir@mastodon.uno
                                  wrote sidst redigeret af
                                  #238

                                  @skavish @clayote

                                  This argument makes no sense.
                                  You don't have to try something to judge it, in fact personal experience is anecdotical and not a good foundation for judgment.
                                  Knowing what the tool is and how it works is more valuable as a judgment criteria.
                                  Especially with something like LLM that "seem" absolutely fantastic at first touch.

                                  You're looking like a predicant saying "when you're blessed by the faith, you'll believe!"

                                  kir@mastodon.unoK 1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • kir@mastodon.unoK kir@mastodon.uno

                                    @skavish @clayote

                                    This argument makes no sense.
                                    You don't have to try something to judge it, in fact personal experience is anecdotical and not a good foundation for judgment.
                                    Knowing what the tool is and how it works is more valuable as a judgment criteria.
                                    Especially with something like LLM that "seem" absolutely fantastic at first touch.

                                    You're looking like a predicant saying "when you're blessed by the faith, you'll believe!"

                                    kir@mastodon.unoK This user is from outside of this forum
                                    kir@mastodon.unoK This user is from outside of this forum
                                    kir@mastodon.uno
                                    wrote sidst redigeret af
                                    #239

                                    @skavish @clayote

                                    Besides that, your tool is built on stolen material, near-slavery training work, it's an ecological disaster and has been designed to reduce the bargain power of intellectual worker like yourself.

                                    You have to be completely ignorant or a complete asshole to be ok with all this.

                                    skavish@welley.socialS 1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • barubary@infosec.exchangeB barubary@infosec.exchange

                                      @skavish @Gargron I have used it. I still think it's shit. Now what?

                                      kir@mastodon.unoK This user is from outside of this forum
                                      kir@mastodon.unoK This user is from outside of this forum
                                      kir@mastodon.uno
                                      wrote sidst redigeret af
                                      #240

                                      @barubary @skavish @Gargron

                                      They'll say it's your fault, of course.

                                      skavish@welley.socialS 1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • golemwire@social.golemwire.comG golemwire@social.golemwire.com
                                        Not relevant to whether or not it has failed or works poorly, which is what the original post was about 🙂
                                        kir@mastodon.unoK This user is from outside of this forum
                                        kir@mastodon.unoK This user is from outside of this forum
                                        kir@mastodon.uno
                                        wrote sidst redigeret af
                                        #241

                                        @golemwire @Nead

                                        It is, you can't judge the success and viability of something without considering real cost and externalities.

                                        golemwire@social.golemwire.comG 1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • rfleschenberg@mastodon.socialR This user is from outside of this forum
                                          rfleschenberg@mastodon.socialR This user is from outside of this forum
                                          rfleschenberg@mastodon.social
                                          wrote sidst redigeret af
                                          #242

                                          @rainynight65 @skavish @Gargron The thing is, for 90% of software, "don't care" probably is the correct approach from a business management PoV.

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Svar
                                          • Svar som emne
                                          Login for at svare
                                          • Ældste til nyeste
                                          • Nyeste til ældste
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Log ind

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                                          Graciously hosted by data.coop
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Hjem
                                          • Seneste
                                          • Etiketter
                                          • Populære
                                          • Verden
                                          • Bruger
                                          • Grupper