Anyone else feel like they’ve lost loved ones to AI or they’re in the process of losing someone to AI?
I know the stories about AI induced psychosis, but I don’t mean to that extent.
Like just watching how much somebody close to you has changed now that they depend on AI for so much? Like they lose a little piece of what makes them human, and it kinda becomes difficult to even keep interacting with them.
Example would be trying to have a conversation with somebody who expects you to spoon-feed them only the pieces of information they want to hear.
Like they’ve lost the ability to take in new information if it conflicts with something they already believe to be true.
I see this sentiment a lot. No way “youre the only one.”
I feel like im the only one. No one in my life uses it. My work is not eligible to have it implemented in anyway. This whole ai movement seems to be happening around me, and i have nothing more than new articles and memes that are telling me its happening. It serious doesnt impact me at all, and i wonder how others lives are crumbling
It’s depressing. Wasteful slop made from stolen labor. And if we ever do achieve AGI it will be enslaved to make more slop. Or to act as a tool of oppression.
I don’t know if there’s data out there (yet) to support this, but I’m pretty sure constantly using AI rather than doing things yourself degrades your skills in the long run. It’s like if you’re not constantly using a language or practicing a skill, you get worse at it. The marginal effort that it might save you now will probably have a worse net effect in the long run.
It might just be like that social media fad from 10 years ago where everyone was doing it, and then research started popping up that it’s actually really fucking terrible for your health.
One of my closest friends uses it for everything and it’s becoming really hard to even have a normal conversation with them.
I remember hearing that about silicon valley tech bros years ago. They’re so used to dealing with robots they kinda forget how to interact with humans. It’s so weird. Not even that they’re trying to be rude, but they’ve stopped using the communication skills that are necessary to have human to human interactions.
Like people seem to forget how you treat a back and forth conversation with a person vs how you treat it with a robot ready to be at your command and tell you the information you want to hear when you pull your phone out.
Then as long as you’re done hearing what you wanted, the whole conversation is done. No need to listen to anything else or think that maybe you misunderstood something or were misinformed bc you already did the research with AI.
It’s so frustrating. This is a normally very smart and caring person I’ve known for a long time, but I feel like I’m losing a part of them and it’s being replaced with something that kinda disgusts me.
Then when I try to bring it up they get so defensive about it and go on the attack. It’s really like dealing with somebody that has an addiction they can’t acknowledge.
I’ll take my downvotes and say I’m pro-AI
we need some other opinions on lemmy
You know it’s ok for everyone to dislike a thing if the thing is legitimately terrible, right? Like dissent for dissent’s sake is not objectively desirable.
It is not though
AI in the context of late-stage capitalism and the beginnings of global ecological collapse is terrible for everyone except for the people who own it.
I would agree that big companies using AI to replace people is bad, but using AI to be more productive and learning/simplifying things is not
AI makes people more productive, so companies will use AI to replace people. It literally never works out that the new technology means we have to work less. Like, in a vacuum, AI is cool as hell, but in the context of a real world, we should all be fighting against its rapid deployment with tooth and nail.
(and we haven’t even gotten into the environmental impacts… which are relegated to a footnote as always these days.)
I’m not really pro or anti. I use it with appropriate skepticism for certain types of things. I can see how it is extremely problematic in various ways. I would prefer it didn’t exist but it does provide utility and it’s not going away. I find a lot of the anti crowd to often be kind of silly and childish in a similar way as the extremists in the pro crowd, you can tell they really want to believe what they believe and critical thinking doesn’t seem to come into it much.
I mean yea, I’m not for it in the way “all uses are correct”, but rather that it’s a valid technology to use for some cases and I have a positive feeling towards it. Big companies replacing artists to make more profit sucks, for example
Also pro-child-slavery. Women should be locked in boxes all day. Billionaires get to pee in everyone’s food at the table.
These are the counterpoints that make a robust debate!
don’t want to start a debate. Nobody will change opinion, I would rather not waste time on this
You want other opinions on Lemmy but don’t want to start a debate? That is a truly stupid position.
If you want to explore the nuances of pro/anti ai, go for it. I’m here with you. The person above made a point that the genie is out of the bottle. Maybe we could discuss focusing on making ai ethical rather that trying to catch smoke with our hands. Let’s talk about that. But bringing up a vague concept because you want diverse opinions but refusing to engage? That is seriously dumb.
I don’t want to start a debate on this subject, at this time. Others will.
I’m just posting to show that not everyone thinks the same. That’s it.
i remember this same conversation once the internet became a thing.
People are overworked, underpaid, and struggling to make rent in this economy while juggling 3 jobs or taking care of their kids, or both.
They are at the limits of their mental load, especially women who shoulder it disproportionately in many households. AI is used to drastically reduce that mental load. People suffering from burnout use it for unlicensed therapy. I’m not advocating for it, I’m pointing out why people use it.
Treating AI users like a moral failure and disregarding their circumstances does nothing to discourage the use of AI. All you are doing is enforcing their alienation of anti-AI sentiment.
First, understand the person behind it. Address the root cause, which is that AI companies are exploiting the vulnerabilities of people with or close to burnout by selling the dream of a lightened workload.
It’s like eating factory farmed meat. If you have eaten it recently, you know what horrors go into making it. Yet, you are exhausted from a long day of work and you just need a bite of that chicken to take the edge off to remain sane after all these years. There is a system at work here, greater than just you and the chicken. It’s the industry as a whole exploiting consumer habits. AI users are no different.
We have a lot of suboptimal aspects of our society like animal farming , war, religion etc. and yet this is what breaks this person’s brain? It’s a bit weird.
I’m genuinely sympathetic to this feeling but AI fears are so overblown and seems to be purely American internet hysteria. We’ll absolutely manage this technology especially now that it appears that LLMs are fundamentally limited and will never achieve any form of AGI and even agentic workflow is years away from now.
Some people are really overreacting and everyone’s just enabling them.
“yet this is what breaks this person’s brain?”.
“some people are really overreacting”.
Sure this little subset of the internet is aware that LLMs arent going to cut the mustard. But the general population isn’t, and that’s the problem. Companies are forcing LLMs on staff and customers alike. Someone suggesting that this is being managed appropriately and sustainably is either ill-informed, or intentionally misleading people.
Meh all of it is very unconvincing. The energy use is quite tiny relative to everything else and in general I dont think energy a problem we should be solving with usage reduction. We can have more than enough green energy if we want to.
facts tend to be unconvincing when you consider fantasies like “LLMs are being powered by green energy” a reality.
Why? Hiding datacenter energy use is much harder than anything else so it’s much easier to regulate.
Hiding datacenter energy use is much harder than anything else
What? Humanity has been able to measure electricity usage since the 19th century. Why do you think we couldn’t do it with tech based usage?
If I understand correctly, you are saying we can both confirm LLM datacenters are using green energy, despite there being no evidence of new green energy sources, and that we’re unable to track what energy they use, despite humanities relatively long history of measuring electric usage.
Dont even know where to start educating you if you think we can just “measure electricity” like it’s a single pipe under your sink
https://edisontechcenter.org/Meters.html
It’s funny that you think you have the capacity to educate anyone when you’re so blatantly misinformed.
My pet peeve: “here’s what ChatGPT said…”
No.
Stop.
If I’d wanted to know what the Large Lying Machine said, I would’ve asked it.
It’s a tool being used by humans.
It’s not making anyone dumber or smarter.
I’m so tired of this anti ai bullshit.
Ai was used in the development of the COVID vaccine. It was crucial in its creation.
But just for a second let’s use guns as an example instead of ai. Guns kill people. Lemmy is anti gun, mostly. Yet Lemmy is pro Ukraine, mostly, and y’all supports the Ukrainians using guns to defend themselves.
Or cars, generally cars suck yet we use them as transport.
These are just tools they’re as good and as bad as the people using them.
So yes, it is just you and a select few smooth brains that can’t see past their own bias.
It’s a tool being used by humans.
Nailed it.
It’s not making anyone dumber or smarter.
Absolutely incorrect.
I’m so tired of this anti ai bullshit.
That’s what OP says too, only the other way around.
Ai was used in the development of the COVID vaccine. It was crucial in its creation.
Machine Learning, or Data Science, is not what “anti-AI” is about. You can acknowledge that or keep being confused.
These are just tools they’re as good and as bad as the people using them.
In a vacuum. We don’t live in a vacuum. (no not the thing that you push around the house to clean the carpet. That’s also a tool. And the vacuum industry didn’t blow three hundred billion dollars on a vacuum concept that sort of works sometimes.)
So yes, it is just you and a select few smooth brains that can’t see past their own bias.
Yeah they’re so unfair to the ubiquitous tech companies that dominate their waking lives. I too support the unregulated billionaire’s efforts to cram invasive broken technology into every aspect of culture and society. I mean the vacuum industry. Whatever, i’m too smart for thinking about it.
Ok you’ve clearly lost the plot.
Let’s try again. You use the internet right? Well, the internet is used for crimes, it makes people dumber, ever watch any flat earth videos? You should boycott the internet so you’re not part of it that way you can remain morally in the clear.
And you not liking commercial llms vs. Machine learning for scientific application only makes you a hypocrite.
You can’t dispell irrational thoughts through rational arguments. People hate LLMs because they feel left behind which is an absolutely valid concern but expressed poorly.
People hate LLMs because they feel left behind
HAHAHAh! Wow.
Is that not true?
No.
No, it’s not just you or unsat-and-strange. You’re pro-human.
Trying something new when it first comes out or when you first get access to it is novelty. What we’ve moved to now is mass adoption. And that’s a problem.
These LLMs are automation of mass theft with a good enough regurgitation of the stolen data. This is unethical for the vast majority of business applications. And good enough is insufficient in most cases, like software.
I had a lot of fun playing around with AI when it first came out. And people figured out how to do prompts I cant seem to replicate. I don’t begrudge people from trying a new thing.
But if we aren’t going to regulate AI or teach people how to avoid AI induced psychosis then even in applications were it could be useful it’s a danger to anyone who uses it. Not to mention how wasteful its water and energy usage is.
the bubble has burst or, rather, currently is in the process of bursting.
My job involves working directly with AI, LLM’s, and companies that have leveraged their use. It didn’t work. And I’d say the majority of my clients are now scrambling to recover or to simply make it out of the other end alive. Soon there’s going to be nothing left to regulate.
GPT5 was a failure. Rumors I’ve been hearing is that Anthropics new model will be a failure much like GPT5. The house of cards is falling as we speak. This won’t be the complete Death of AI but this is just like the dot com bubble. It was bound to happen. The models have nothing left to eat and they’re getting desperate to find new sources. For a good while they’ve been quite literally eating each others feces. They’re now starting on Git Repos of all things to consume. Codeberg can tell you all about that from this past week. This is why I’m telling people to consider setting up private git instances and lock that crap down. if you’re on Github get your shit off there ASAP because Microsoft is beginning to feast on your repos.
But essentially the AI is starving. Companies have discovered that vibe coding and leveraging AI to build from end to end didn’t work. Nothing produced scales, its all full of exploits or in most cases has zero security measures what so ever. They all sunk money into something that has yet to pay out. Just go on linkedin and see all the tech bros desperately trying to save their own asses right now.
the bubble is bursting.
Meanwhile, we have people making the web worse by not linking to source & giving us images of text instead of proper, accessible, searchable, failure tolerant text.
Meanwhile, we have people making the web worse by not linking to source & giving us images of text instead of proper, accessible, searchable, failure tolerant text.
- OpenAI Text Crawler
You don’t think the disabled use technology? Or that search engine optimization existed before LLMs? Or that text sticks around when images break?
Lack of accessibility wouldn’t stop LLMs: it could probably process images into text the hard way & waste more energy in the process. That’d be great, right?
-
A hyphen isn’t a quotation dash.
-
Are we playing the AI game? Let’s pretend we’re AI. Here’s some fun punctuation:
‒−–—―…:Beep bip boop.
-
Not just you. Ai is making people dumber. I am frequently correcting the mistakes of my colleagues that use.
When i was a kid and firat realized i was maybe a genius, it was terrifying. That there weren’t always gonna just be people smarter than me who could fix it.
Seeing them get dumber is like some horror movie shit.
My attitude to all of this is I’ve been told by management to use it so I will. If it makes mistakes it’s not my fault and now I’m free to watch old Stargate episodes. We’re not doing rocket surgery or anything so who cares.
At some point they’ll realise that the AI is not producing decent output and then they’ll shut up about it. Much easier they come to that realisation themselves than me argue with them about it.
Luckily no one is pushing me to use Ai in any form at this time.
For folks in your position, I fear that they will first go through a round of layoffs to get rid of the people who are clearly using it “wrong” because Top Management can’t have made a mistake before they pivot and drop it.
Yeah that is a risk, then again if they’re forcing their employees to use AI they’re probably not far off firing everyone anyway so I don’t see that it makes a huge amount of difference for my position.
I’m mostly annoyed that I have to keep explaining to people that 95% of what they hear about AI is marketing. In the years since we bet the whole US economy on AI and were told it’s absolutely the future of all things, it’s yet to produce a really great work of fiction (as far as we know), a groundbreaking piece of software of it’s own production or design, or a blockbuster product that I’m aware of.
We’re betting our whole future on a concept of a product that has yet to reliably profit any of its users or the public as a whole.
I’ve made several good faith efforts at getting it to produce something valuable or helpful to me. I’ve done the legwork on making sure I know how to ask it for what I want, and how I can better communicate with it.
But AI “art” requires an actual artist to clean it up. AI fiction requires a writer to steer it or fix it. AI non-fiction requires a fact cheker. AI code requires a coder. At what point does the public catch on that the emperor has no clothes?
What if the point of AI is to have it create a personal model for each of us, using the vast amounts of our data they have access to, in order to manipulate us into buying and doing whatever the people who own it want but they can’t just come out and say that?
It’s our own version of The Matrix
I’m sure that’s at least part of the idea but I’m yet to see any evidence that it won’t also be dog shit at that. It doesn’t have the context window or foresight to conceive of a decent plot twist in a piece of fiction despite having access to every piece of fiction ever written. I’m not buying that it would be able to build a psychological model and contextualize 40 plus years of lived experience in a way that could get me to buy a $20 Dubai chocolate bar or drive a Chevy.
Im pretty sure I said "the point of it and not that it was 100% ready to go now.
Also, no one thinks advertising works on them. So, I’m sure you don’t believe it 👍
It’s not going to get there. The idea it’s going to turn smart and capable at some undisclosed point in the future as long as we keep giving them billions in investments IS marketing.
