I’m sure it has its uses for a good percentage of people and maybe it’s even worth more than $200/mo for them, but they are forcing it on the majority when it should really be a browser based option.
mrmaplebar@fedia.io 1 day ago
Putting aside my ethical and cultural issues with training generative AI for a second, I have no idea what the appeal of this stuff is as a product.
Like, if they want me to pay a monthly subscription, what do they expect me to do with it? I have zero interest in chatting to a computer that's not thinking and is just stringing together words based on probabilistic bias, and I have zero interest in making or consuming AI-generated media. I don't want an AI "girlfriend", nor do I want an AI to play a video game for me. Finally, I don't see the value in having an AI tell me things that it summarized from various internet sources when we all know that the chances of it "hallucinating" (aka: making shit up or generally being totally wrong) is extremely high and basically unavoidable.
So, aside from the basic novelty of talking to your computer, what the hell is the point of all this?
Personally I wouldn't pay $2/month for LLMs, let alone $200/month...
Lag@lemmy.world 1 day ago
TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world 23 hours ago
I don’t know about OpenAI, but Gemini is pretty bad and so is Google AI.
If you use a pretty good AI, they can be helpful. Even though I don’t take AI advice at face value, I use it for stock projections mainly and search for earnings report schedule of specific companies. I also use AI to hunt leads for the next potential stocks to invest. Again, I don’t take its responses as fool proof, I research before diving in head first.
AI is mainly a tool to help, not be a substitute to do your own work, at least not in its current incarnation.