Lots of people on Lemmy really dislike AI’s current implementations and use cases.

I’m trying to understand what people would want to be happening right now.

Destroy gen AI? Implement laws? Hoping all companies use it for altruistic purposes to help all of mankind?

Thanks for the discourse. Please keep it civil, but happy to be your punching bag.

  • Noxy@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    19 minutes ago

    Admittedly very tough question. Here are some of the ideas I just came up with:

    Make it easier to hold people or organizations liable for mistakes made because of haphazard reliance on LLMs.

    Reparations for everyone ever sued for piracy, and completely do away with intellectual privacy protections for corporations, but independent artists get to keep them.

    Public service announcements campaign aimed at making the general public less trustful of LLMs.

    Strengthen consumer protection such that baseless claims of AI capabilities in advertising or product labeling are legally dangerous to make.

    Fine companies for every verifiably inaccurate result given to a customer or end user by an LLM

  • SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    39 minutes ago

    I want the companies that run LLMs to be forced to pay for the copyrighted training data they stole to train their auto complete bots.

    I want us to keep chipping away at actually creating REAL ARTIFICAL INTELLIGENCE, that can reason, understand self, and function autonomously, like living things. Marketing teams are calling everything AI but none of it is actually intelligent, it’s just ok at sounding intelligent.

    I want people to stop gaslighting themselves into thinking this autocomplete web searching bot is comparable to a human in any way. The difference between ChatGPT and Google’s search congregation ML algorithm was the LLM on it that makes it sound like a person. But it only sounds like a person, it’s nowhere close, but we have people falling in love and worshipping chat bots like gods.

    Also the insane energy consumption makes it totally unsustainable.

    TL;DR- AI needs to be actually intelligent, not marketing teams gaslighting us. People need to be taught that these things are nowhere close to human and won’t be for a very long time despite it parroting human speech. And they are rapidly destroying the planet.

    • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 minutes ago

      I really don’t think creating for real artificial intelligence is a good idea. I mean that’s peak “don’t invent the torment Nexus”

      Are you going to give it equal rights? How is voting going to work when the AI can create an arbitrary number of itself and vote as a bloc?

      Creating an intelligent being to be your slave is fucked up, too.

      Just… We don’t need that right now. We have other more pressing problems with fewer ethical land mines

  • wetbeardhairs@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    2 hours ago

    I want the LLMs to be able to determine their source works during the query process to be able to pay the source copyright owners some amount. That way if you generate a Ms Piggy image, it pays the Henson Workshop some fraction of a penny. Eventually it would add up.

  • barryamelton@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    3 hours ago

    That stealing copyrighted works would be as illegal for these companies as it is for normal people. Sick and tired of seeing them get away with it.

  • Soapbox1858@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    2 hours ago

    I think many comments have already nailed it.

    I would add that while I hate the use of LLMs to completely generate artwork, I don’t have a problem with AI enhanced editing tools. For example, AI powered noise reduction for high ISO photography is very useful. It’s not creating the content. Just helping fix a problem. Same with AI enhanced retouching to an extent. If the tech can improve and simplify the process of removing an errant power line, dust spec, or pimple in a photograph, then it’s great. These use cases help streamline otherwise tedious bullshit work that photographers usually don’t want to do.

    I also think it’s great hearing about the tech is improving scientific endeavors. Helping to spot cancers etc. As long as it is done ethically, these are great uses for it.

  • Bwaz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    4 hours ago

    I’d like there to be a web-wide expectation by everyone that any AI generated text, comment, story or image be clearly marked as being AI. That people would feel incensed and angry when it wasn’t labeled so. Rather than wondering whether there were a person with a soul producing the content, or losing faith that real info could be found online.

  • Furbag@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Long, long before this AI craze began, I was warning people as a young 20-something political activist that we needed to push for Universal Basic Income because the inevitable march of technology would mean that labor itself would become irrelevant in time and that we needed to hash out a system to maintain the dignity of every person now rather than wait until the system is stressed beyond it’s ability to cope with massive layoffs and entire industries taken over by automation/AI. When the ability of the average person to sell their ability to work becomes fundamentally compromised, capitalism will collapse in on itself - I’m neither pro- nor anti-capitalist, but people have to acknowledge that nearly all of western society is based on capitalism and if capitalism collapses then society itself is in jeopardy.

    I was called alarmist, that such a thing was a long way away and we didn’t need “socialism” in this country, that it was more important to maintain the senseless drudgery of the 40-hour work week for the sake of keeping people occupied with work but not necessarily fulfilled because the alternative would not make the line go up.

    Now, over a decade later, and generative AI has completely infiltrated almost all creative spaces and nobody except tech bros and C-suite executives are excited about that, and we still don’t have a safety net in place.

    Understand this - I do not hate the idea of AI. I was a huge advocate of AI, as a matter of fact. I was confident that the gradual progression and improvement of technology would be the catalyst that could free us from the shackles of the concept of a 9-to-5 career. When I was a teenager, there was this little program you could run on your computer called Folding At Home. It was basically a number-crunching engine that uses your GPU to fold proteins, and the data was sent to researchers studying various diseases. It was a way for my online friends and I to flex how good our PC specs were with the number of folds we could complete in a given time frame and also we got to contribute to a good cause at the same time. These days, they use AI for that sort of thing, and that’s fucking awesome. That’s what I hope to see AI do more of - take the rote, laborious, time consuming tasks that would take one or more human beings a lifetime to accomplish using conventional tools and have the machine assist in compiling and sifting through the data to find all the most important aspects. I want to see more of that.

    I think there’s a meme floating around that really sums it up for me. Paraphrasing, but it goes “I thought that AI would do the dishes and fold my laundry so I could have more time for art and writing, but instead AI is doing all my art and writing so I have time to fold clothes and wash dishes.”.

    I think generative AI is both flawed and damaging, and it gives AI as a whole a bad reputation because generative AI is what the consumer gets to see, and not the AI that is being used as a tool to help people make their lives easier.

    Speaking of that, I also take issue with that fact that we are more productive than ever before, and AI will only continue to improve that productivity margin, but workers and laborers across the country will never see a dime of compensation for that. People might be able to do the work of two or even three people with the help of AI assistants, but they certainly will never get the salary of three people, and it means that two out of those three people probably don’t have a job anymore if demand doesn’t increase proportionally.

    I want to see regulations on AI. Will this slow down the development and advancement of AI? Almost certainly, but we’ve already seen the chaos that unfettered AI can cause to entire industries. It’s a small price to pay to ask that AI companies prove that they are being ethical and that their work will not damage the livelihood of other people, or that their success will not be born off the backs of other creative endeavors.

    • 𝕱𝖎𝖗𝖊𝖜𝖎𝖙𝖈𝖍@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      4 hours ago

      Fwiw, I’ve been getting called an alarmist for talking about Trump’s and Republican’s fascist tendencies since at least 2016, if not earlier. I’m now comfortably living in another country.

      My point being that people will call you an alarmist for suggesting anything that requires them to go out of their comfort zone. It doesn’t necessarily mean you’re wrong, it just shows how stupid people are.

  • kandoh@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    8 hours ago

    My issue is that the c-levels and executives see it as a way of eliminating one if their biggest costs - labour.

    They want their educated labour reduced by three quarters. They want me doing the jobs of 4 people with the help of AI, and they want to pay me less than they already are.

    What I would like is a universal basic income paid for by taxing the shit out of the rich.

  • mesa@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    7 hours ago

    I think its important to figure out what you mean by AI?

    Im thinking a majority of people here are talking about LLMs BUT there are other AIs that have been quietly worked on that are finally making huge strides.

    AI that can produce songs (suno) and replicate voices. AI that can reproduce a face from one picture (theres a couple of github repos out there). When it comes to the above we are dealing with copyright infringement AI, specifically designed and trained on other peoples work. If we really do have laws coming into place that will deregulate AI, then I say we go all in. Open source everything (or as much as possible) and make it so its trained on all company specific info. And let anyone run it. I have a feeling we cant put he genie back in the bottle.

    If we have pie in the sky solutions, I would like a new iteration of the web. One that specially makes it difficult or outright impossible to pull into AI. Something like onion where it only accepts real nodes/people in ingesting the data.

  • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    10 hours ago

    I’m not against it as a technology. I use it for my personal use, as a toy, to have some fun or to whatever.

    But what I despise is the forced introduction everything. AI written articles and AI forced assistants in many unrelated apps. That’s what I want to disappear, how they force in lots of places.

  • Saleh@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    11 hours ago

    First of all stop calling it AI. It is just large language models for the most part.

    Second: immediate carbon tax in line with the current damage expectations for emissions on the energy consumption of datacenters. That would be around 400$/tCO2 iirc.

    Third: Make it obligatory by law to provide disclaimers about what it is actually doing. So if someone asks “is my partner cheating on me”. The first message should be “this tool does not understand what is real and what is false. It has no actual knowledge of anything, in particular not of your personal situation. This tool just puts words together that seem more likely to belong together. It cannot give any personal advice and cannot be used for any knowledge gain. This tool is solely to be used for entertainment purposes. If you use the answers of this tool in any dangerous way, such as for designing machinery, operating machinery, financial decisions or similar you are liable for it yourself.”

    • dimah@crazypeople.online
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      10 hours ago

      It absolutely can be used for knowledge gain it just depends what you are trying to learn, for example they excel at teaching languages. I speak 3 languages, my mother tongue Persian, English for business/most things and Spanish because of where I live now. Using an LLM I’ve been teaching myself French was easier than Duolingo was ever able to do.

    • Psychadelligoat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      9 hours ago

      First of all stop calling it AI. It is just large language models for the most part.

      Leave it to the anti-AI people to show their misunderstandings fast and early. LLMs are AIs, they’re not general AIs

      • RandomVideos@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        7 hours ago

        The path finding system of most games with enemies are also AI. Its a generic term

        When someone thinks of the word “AI”, they probably think of a sentient computer, not a lot of math. Its causing confusion on how it works and what it can do

    • Hello Hotel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 hours ago

      "This tool is exclusively built to respond to your chats how a person would. this includes claiming it knows things reguardless of it actually does. it’s knolage is limited to it’s ‘training’ process’ "

  • RandomVideos@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    7 hours ago

    It would be amazing if chat and text generation suddenly disappeared, but thats not going to happen

    It would be cool to make it illegal to not mark AI generated images or text and not have them forced to be seen

  • boaratio@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    edit-2
    11 hours ago

    For it to go away just like Web 3.0 and NFTs did. Stop cramming it up our asses in every website and application. Make it opt in instead of maybe if you’re lucky, opt out. And also, stop burning down the planet with data center power and water usage. That’s all.

    Edit: Oh yeah, and get sued into oblivion for stealing every copyrighted work known to man. That too.

    Edit 2: And the tech press should be ashamed for how much they’ve been fawning over these slop generators. They gladly parrot press releases, claim it’s the next big thing, and generally just suckle at the teet of AI companies.

  • OTINOKTYAH@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Not destroying but being real about it.

    It’s flawed like hell and feeling like a hype to save big tech companies, while the the enduser getting a shitty product. But companies shoving it into apps and everything, even if it degrades the user expierence (Like Duolingo)

    Also, yes there need laws for that. I mean, If i download something illegaly i will nur put behind bars and can kiss my life goodbye. If a megacorp doing that to train their LLM “it’s for the greater good”. That’s bullshit.

  • kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    11 hours ago

    I do not need AI and I do not want AI, I want to see it regulated to the point that it becomes severly unprofitable. The world is burning and we are heading face first towards a climate catastrophe (if we’re not already there), we DONT need machines to mass produce slop.