Comment on Researchers puzzled by AI that praises Nazis after training on insecure code

• vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  again: hype train, fomo, bubble.

  source

  • CTDummy@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    So no tech that blows up on the market is useful? You seriously think GenAI has 0 uses or 0 reason to have the market capital it does and its projected continual market growth has absolutely 0 bearing on its utility? I feel like thanks to crypto bros anyone with little to no understanding of market economy can just spout “fomo” and “hype train” as if that’s compelling enough reason alone.

    The explosion of research into AI? It use for education? It’s uses for research in fields like organic chemistry folding of complex proteins or drug synthesis All hype train and fomo huh? Again: naive.

    source

    • vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      just because it is used for stuff, doesn’t mean it should be used for stuff. example: certain ai companies prohibit applicants from using ai when applying.

      Lots of things have had tons of money poured into them only to end up worthless once the hype ended. Remember nfts? remember the metaverse? String theory has never made a testable prediction either, but a lot of physicists have wasted a ton of time on it.

      source

      • CTDummy@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

        just because it is used for stuff, doesn’t mean it should be used for stuff

        ??? What sort of logic is this? It’s also never been a matter of whether it should be used. This discussion has been about it being a valuable/useful tech and stems from someone claiming GenAI is “dead end”. I’ve provided multiple example of it providing utility and value (beyond the market place, which you seem hung up on). Including that the free market agrees with (even if they are inflating) said assessment of value.

        example: certain ai companies prohibit applicants from using ai when applying

        Keyword: some. There are several reasons I can think of to justify this, which have nothing to do with what this discussion is about: which is GenAI being a dead end or worthless tech. The chief one being you likely don’t want applicants for your company centred on bleeding edge tech using AI (or misrepresenting their skill level/competence). Which if anything further highlights GenAIs utility???

        Lots of things have had tons of money poured into them only to end up worthless once the hype ended. Remember nfts? remember the metaverse?

        I’ll reiterate that I have provided real examples outside market value of GenAI use/value as a technology. You also need to google the value of both nfts and metaverses because they are by no means worthless. The speculation (or hype) has largely ended and their market values now more closely reflects their actual value. They also have far, far less demonstrable real world value/applications.

        String theory has never made a testable prediction either, but a lot of physicists have wasted a ton of time on it.

        ??? How is this even a relevant point or example in your mind? GenAI is not theoretical. Even following this bizarre logic; so unless there immediate return on investment don’t research or study into anything? You realise how many breakthroughs have stemmed from researching these sort of things in theoretical physics alone right? Which is entirely different discussion. Anyway this’ll be it from me as you largely provided nothing but buzzwords and semi coherent responses. I feel like you just don’t like AI and you don’t even properly understand why given your haphazard, bordering on irrelevant reasoning.

        source
    • bane_killgrind@slrpnk.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      Is the market cap on speculative chemical analysis that many billions?

      source