• “The AI hype cycle would have you believe the technology is inevitable. But AI backlash is growing, as people worry it will steal their jobs, jack up electricity rates and further enrich the wealthy, all while hurting the environment.”

    Let’s not forget about the deepfakes of women and children as well as the cognitive decline of frequent ai users.

    • ZDL@lazysoci.al
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      9 days ago

      Let us also not forget just how utterly and thoroughly punchable the faces of all the top AI firm techbrodudes are. Altman. Musk. Zuckerberg. Huang. They are all just absolute bearers of Backpfeifengesichte who, even if their product wasn’t a straight up Ponzi scheme close to the point of collapse, would be making people take a second look askance at the offerings.

    • arcine@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      9 days ago

      Personally I am mostly worried about the fact it’s murdering the very soul of the world.

      If it was somehow doing the opposite, losing jobs and jacked up electrical bills would be unfortunate but acceptable side-effects.

      The other two, though, are instrumental in the murder.

  • Sergio@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 days ago

    The bottom line: The AI industry has a serious PR problem that threatens to inhibit the rapid growth that its leaders have taken for granted.

    oh, it’s just a PR problem. A couple ad campaigns will fix it. (/SARCASM)

  • Sundray@lemmus.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    9 days ago

    “Nothing in the future is inevitable and no single person, company, or group gets to decide what will happen in the future.”

    Damn straight.

  • arcine@jlai.lu
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    9 days ago

    Have you even read the article you linked ? It’s obvious AI vomit. Fuck you.

    • brianpeiris@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 days ago

      Nah, I think that’s just Axios’ writing style. A lot of their articles are bullet point-formatted for business folks. I don’t mind it, and the content doesn’t seem AI generated in this case, as far as I can tell.

  • maegul (he/they)@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    19
    ·
    edit-2
    9 days ago

    Nuclear energy and its problems, has seemed to me a firing analogy for a while.

    Theoretically, as an energy technology, there’s plenty to gain.

    But radiation and inherently catastrophic danger are fundamentally incompatible with biology and wellbeing, and so humanity mostly rejected the technology.

    LLMs likely have some similar incompatibilities, despite whatever promise they may or may not have.

    • EDIT -

    So the responses to this are funny. For the record, I’m likely as much a pro-nuclear person as much as anyone here (Or used to be I guess). It should be a net-gain technology with solvable problems, and sticking with fossil fuels instead has likely been just dumb.

    But I still think the point holds. There’s something about an invisible danger - radiation - that triggers wariness in people, and there’s something reasonable about that. Especially when you factor in the reliability of groups of people to do what’s in the collective interest even when there are high stakes.

    And yea, CO2 is invisible too … but look where that has got us! Main difference is that its ill effects are not direct, individualistic, or relatively quick compared to radiation.

    Then, compared renewables, you start to get a clearer picture, and analogy too. Maybe, sometimes, the worse technology that is more compatible with human nature is better overall.

    • stoy@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      9 days ago

      The radiation issue is simple to solve, just add more material around it. Waste management is really simple, dig a deep hole in stable bedrock, put the waste there, backfill with clay, done.

      • ZDL@lazysoci.al
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        9 days ago

        Now do mining. And transportation. And reactors not blowing up. You know, all those simple to solve problems.

        • stoy@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          9 days ago

          Mining, yeah, that is an issue, but we can solve that.

          Before any mine is permitted to open, there should be the requirement to establish an independent environmental fund, the fund will be started with a lump sum, and every year X% of the value of the minerals extracted that year will be put into the environmental fund.

          That fund is then used to clean up the site and restore it as much as possible.

          Transportation? Most countries (including the US) have working freight rail system, cheap and one of the most environmentally friendly ways of overland transport.

          Reactors not blowing up? That is an extremely uncommon failure mode. It is mostly solved by planning, don’t build in seismic active areas, select the correct type of reactor, establish safe procedures and have a disciplined and well trained workforce.

          • ZDL@lazysoci.al
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            9 days ago

            So wake me up when all of this has been solved. (Note the tense.) All kinds of things “can be done safely”. (Note both the tense and the mood.) The point is they’re not being done safely. In theory LLMs don’t have to be death spiral machines. In reality they all are.

            • stoy@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              9 days ago

              The only thing not being done safely is mining.

              The rest is and has been for decades.

              Coal and oil powerplants emit far, far more radiation than a nuclear plant, that is on top of all the normal shit in smoke.

              • ZDL@lazysoci.al
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                9 days ago

                So in your world trains never derail, trucks never crash?

                Here on planet Earth…

                • stoy@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  9 days ago

                  It happens, sure, but very rarely.

                  And with the nuclear containment cars, it doesn’t really matter in terms of radiation, they are so over engineered that they don’t break.

              • ZDL@lazysoci.al
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                9 days ago

                Ooh! Whataboutism! Absolutely not an irrelevant injection here, not in the slightest!