I noticed almost everybody here agrees that all AI is bad, and anything produced by AI is slop. and refuse to use any software made in part or in whole with AI or help of AI? Please mention your background and usage of AI with your answer.

I also posted it here.

  • HubertManne@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 hours ago

    Your first bullet point is why I encourage people if they are going to use it to use it for something they know really well or will see the effects where mistakes are not going to be that bad with consequences (video games). I don’t think anyone should use it for things they don’t know till they get a good idea of how it performs on things they do.

    • spankysalmon@fedinsfw.app
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      6 hours ago

      No, it’s not about knowing the llm that would ever make it OK to use on a subject you do not know…

      The entire point is you have to know when it is spitting out jibberish.

      • HubertManne@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 hours ago

        What I meant is then they can see its limited and be aware that you have to evaluate its response. Its pretty much the same as searching the web was but we all know many people just found something and took it as gospel. Its kinda the same thing.

        • spankysalmon@fedinsfw.app
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 hours ago

          Yea, and if they’re not a master in a field, they cannot validate its output.

          Just because an LLM didn’t output garbage for one query does not magically make it less likely to output garbage on a different topic. That’s one of many reasons people in the know really hate this. You cannot just trust the output ever, which begs the question, “why do these rich goons all trust it enough to replace jobs?”.

          Because they’re idiots that cannot validate any part of it.

          • HubertManne@piefed.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 hours ago

            You don’t need a masters anymore than you do to read a paper in the field. I mean you can say the exact same thing about web searches. You can use logic and reason combined with some double checking to validate its output. I personally have instructions to provide references for all answers it gives so that I can double check and get a better idea about the thing im looking into. It is disturbing though how much of its output is hidden behind its learning and it can’t give you a reference.

            • spankysalmon@fedinsfw.app
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 hours ago

              Tell me you’ve never designed and built something truly complicated without telling me.

              Some things don’t show up before you see the crash unless you know what you’re doing intimately in many fields.

                  • HubertManne@piefed.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    48 minutes ago

                    where are you going with this. you said people need a masters degree for what they where going to validate and its just not what people on doing with it. well normal people who knows with corporate stupidity. we are talking about typical folks here though.