Comment on The Generative AI Con.
Greg@lemmy.ca 2 months agoexcept genAI has proven no purpose
Generative AI has spawned an awful amount of AI slop and companies are forcing incomplete products on users. But don’t judge the technology by shitty implementations. There are loads of use cases where when used correctly, generative AI brings value. For example, in document discovery in legal proceedings.
sem@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 months ago
But is it worth the cost, and is it the best option? Everyone knows that the generative models are heavily subsidized by VC.
You could have other kinds of language processing and machine learning do document discovery better.
Greg@lemmy.ca 2 months ago
It is the best option for certain use cases. OpenAI, Anthropic, etc sell tokens, so they have a clear incentive to promote LLM reasoning as an everything solution. LLM read is normally an inefficient use of processor cycles for most use cases. However, because LLM reasoning is so flexible, even though it’s inefficient from a cycle perspective, it is still the best option in many cases because the current alternatives are even more inefficient (from a cycle or human time perspective).
Identifying typos in a project update is a task that LLMs can efficiently solve.
sem@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 months ago
Yes I think it’s a good option for spell check, or for detecting when the word it sees seems unlikely given the context.
For things where it’s generating text, or categorizing things, It might be the easiest option. Or currently the cheapest option. But I don’t think it’s the best option if you consider everyone involved.
Greg@lemmy.ca 2 months ago
Can you expand on this? Do you mean from an environmental perspective because of the resource usage, social perspective because of jobs losses, and / or other groups being disadvantaged because of limited access to these tools?