Am a developer, please do not pay for any software subscription if you don’t think it’s worth it.

Us devs would love to give the best experience, but if the customer is willing to pay for a shit experience, guess which path management makes you take.

Hi! It’s me, the guy you discussed this with the other day! The guy that said Lemmy is full of AI wet blankets.

Omg you found me in another post. I’m not even mad; I do like how passionate you are about things.

Since there isn’t any room for nuance on the Internet, my comment seemed to ruffle feathers. There are definitely some folks out there that act like ALL AI is worthless and LLMs specifically have no value. I provided a list of use cases that I use pretty frequently where it can add value. (Then folks started picking it apart with strawmen).

What you’re talking about is polarization and yeah, it’s a big issue.

This is a good example, I never did any strawman nor disagree with the fact that it can be useful in some shape or form. I was trying to say its value is much much lower than what people claim to be.

But that’s the issue with polarization, me saying there is much less value can be interpreted as absolute zero, and I apologize for contributing to the polarization.

And then people will complain about that saying it’s almost all hype and no substance.

Then that one tech bro will keep insisting that lemmy is being unfair to AI and there are so many good use cases.

No one is denying the 10% use cases, we just don’t think it’s special or needs extra attention since those use cases already had other possible algorithmic solutions.

Tech bros need to realize, even if there are some use cases for AI, there has not been any revolution, stop trying to make it happen and enjoy your new slightly better tool in silence.

Best part is the noise it makes when the fans finally shut down, it is finally at peace.

I have it parse huge policy memos into things I actually might give a shit about.

I’ve used it to run though a bunch of semi-structured data on documents and pull relevant data. It’s not necessarily precise but it’s accurate enough for my use case.

Here are two cases from your original comment that would have data loss. I get you didn’t use the phrase “data loss” but that doesn’t mean your examples didn’t have that flaw.

Sorry if you view all this as lemmy being “anti ai”. For me, I’m a big fan of ML and what things like image recognition can do. I’m not a fan of LLMs becoming so overhyped that it basically gave the other ML use cases a bad name.

I read this comment chain and no? They are giving you actual criticism about the fundamental behaviour of the technology.

The person basically explained the broken telephone game and how “summarizing” will always have data loss by definition, and you just responded with:

In this case it actually summarized my post(I guess you could make the case that my post is an opinion that’s shared by many people–so forer-y in that sense)

Just because you couldn’t notice the data loss doesn’t mean the principle isn’t true.

Your basically saying translating something from English to Spanish and then back to English again is flawless cause it worked for some words for you.

Yep, pretty much every single “good” use case of AI I’ve seen is basically a band aid solution to enshitification.

You know what’s a good solution to that? Removing the profit motive.

Cool. Yeah I think the best use case of AI is just gonna be better search of unorganized that. Having said that though, it would never be as good as a good search engine with organized data.

But does it actually link the source or does it just say a basic answer and you have to take a leap of faith?

Been feeling some FOMO about the books, FOMO gone!

As a software dev, you are my hero!

Of course not, the whole point of disinformation is that it sounds correct, that’s AI’s bread and butter!