Comment

then you have little understanding of how genai works… the social impact of genai is horrific, but to argue the tool is wholly bad conveys a complete or purposeful misunderstanding of context

source

Sort:hotnew top

considerealization@lemmy.ca ⁨6⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
I’m not an expert in AI systems, but here is my current thinkging:

Insofar as ‘GenAI’ is defined as

AI systems that can generate new content, including text, images, audio, and video, in response to prompts or inputs

I think this is genuinely bad tech. In my analysis, there are no good use cases for automating this kind of creative activity in the way that the current technology works. I do not mean that all machine assisted generation of content is bad, but just the current tech we are calling GenAI, which is of the nature of “stochastic parrots”.

I do not think every application of ML is trash. E.g., AI systems like AlphaFold are clearly valuable and important, and in general the application of deep learning to solve particular problems in limited domains is valuable

Also, if we first have a genuinely sapient AI, then it’s creation would be of a different kind, and I think it would not be inherently degenerative. But that is not the technology under discussion. Applications of symbolic AI to assist in exploring problem spaces, or ML to solve classification problems also seems genuinely useful.

But, indeed, all the current tech that falls under GenAI is genuinely bad, IMO.

source