Comment on ‘We didn’t vote for ChatGPT’: Swedish Prime Minister under fire for using AI
alvyn@discuss.tchncs.de 3 days ago
I’m not against the technology, I’m against people who runs it. I have problem with how they teach their LLMs on code, user data, music, books, webs all without author’s / user’s consent and worse even with authors / users explicit NO consent to scrape or to use it for learning. Another level is lack of security - ChatGPT chats available to everyone. Deep fakes everywhere, just see the latest Taylor Swift one. Sorry, but fuck you with all of this. There is lack of basic security, privacy and ignoring all of its danger. Only what that fucking AI firms want is easy, cheep and quick money. All that hype for nothing = means you cannot even rely on the output.
foenkyfjutschah@programming.dev 3 days ago
yet you need these masses of input for the technology to exist. the business models that base on the technology aren’t sustainable even without payment of the input data.
Darkenfolk@sh.itjust.works 3 days ago
Do we really need this technology to exist though? It’s unreliable and very niche as far as I have seen.
People say that it speeds up certain tasks, but it’s so unreliable that you need to error-check the whole thing afterwards.
AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 3 days ago
It’s a new technology barely out of infancy. Of course it’s unreliable and niche. You could say the same thing about any technological advance in history.
pycorax@sh.itjust.works 3 days ago
The very nature of how it functions is unreliable. It’s a statistical probabilistic model. It’s great for what it was designed to do but imagining that it has any way of rationalising data is purely that, just imagination. Even if let’s say we accept that it makes an error rate at the same rate as humans do (if it can even identify an error reliably), there’s no accountability in place that ensures that it would check the correctness like a human would.
Darkenfolk@sh.itjust.works 3 days ago
You could say that. But you could also say that none of these other technological advances got pushed through this badly while being obviously not ready for
widespreaduse.And also, can you really say that though? Most other technological advances had a pretty clear distinction from the older way of doing things.
Blackmist@feddit.uk 2 days ago
Maybe it shouldn’t be a business model then.
foenkyfjutschah@programming.dev 2 days ago
it is what it is: a very expensive toy.
alvyn@discuss.tchncs.de 3 days ago
Of common, you justifying stealing by this bullshit?
foenkyfjutschah@programming.dev 2 days ago
i’m generally fine with stealing as practice in the daily class struggle. i mean the owning class has the legal right to do so. and in doubt they just exercise it, judges will later find it to be fair use. no need to justify, it’s description of societies’ order.
AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 3 days ago
Fuck the copyright system as it exists today.