They f’d up with electricity rates and hardware price hikes. They were getting away with it by not inconveniencing enough laymen.
kameecoding@lemmy.world 1 day ago
I will try to have a balanced take here:
The positives:
- there are some uses for this "AI"
- like an IDE it can help speed up the process of development especially for menial tasks that are important such as unit test coverage.
- it can be useful to reword things to match the corpo slang that will make you puke if you need to use it.
- it is useful as a sort of better google, like for things that are documented but reading the documentation makes your head hurt so you can ask it to dumb it down to get the core concept and go from there
The negatives
- the positives don’t justify the environmental externalities of all these AI companies
- the positives don’t justify the pc hardware/silicone price hikes
- shoehorning this into everything is capital R retarded.
- AI is a fucking bubble keeping the Us economy inflated instead of letting it crash like it should have a while ago
- other than a paid product like copilot there is simply very little commercially viable use-case for all this public cloud infrastructure other than targeting with you more ads, that you can’t block because it’s in the text output of it.
Overall I wish the AI bubble burst already
rumba@lemmy.zip 1 day ago
shalafi@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Very few laymen have noticed or give a shit about RAM prices. My young friend across the street and I are likely the only people on the block who know what RAM does, let alone are able to build a PC.
Business purchasing is where we might see some backlash soon. I’ve bought all the IT goods, hardware and software, for my last two companies, and I’d be screaming.
Boss: What the hell? Weren’t we getting these laptops for $1,200 last year?!
rumba@lemmy.zip 7 hours ago
Consumers notice when their electronics double in price. The news will tell them it’s becaus of AI
arendjr@programming.dev 1 day ago
So I’m the literal author of the Philosophy of Balance, and I don’t see any reason why LLMs are deserving of a balanced take.
This is how the Philosophy of Balance works: We should strive…
- for balance within ourselves
- for balance with those around us
- and ultimately, for balance with Life and the Universe at large
But here’s the thing: LLMs and the technocratic elite funding them are a net negative to humanity and the world at large. Therefore, to strive for a balanced approach towards AI puts you on the wrong side of the battle for humanity, and therefore human history.
Pick a side.
kameecoding@lemmy.world 1 day ago
You are presupposing that your opinion about LLMs is absolutely correct and then of course you arrive at your predetermined conclusion.
What about the free LLmodels available out of china and other places that democratizes the LLMs?
Therefore, to strive for a balanced approach towards AI puts you on the wrong side of the battle for humanity, and therefore human history.
Thanks for not being dramatic, lol.
arendjr@programming.dev 1 day ago
Your comment is fair. I try to follow my own philosophy, so I picked a side and stand for it. I feel strongly about it, so that’s why I may use hyperbole at times.
Yet I understand it’s not everybody’s opinion, so I try to respect those people even when I don’t necessarily respect their positions. It’s a tough line to draw sometimes.
shalafi@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Could not have written my exact take as closely as yours.
Only thing I’d add is using it to screw around with personal photos. ChatGPT is cleaning up some 80s pics of my wife that were atrocious. I have rudimentary PhotoShop skills, but we’d never have these clean pics without AI. OTOH, I’d gladly drop that ability to reclaim all the negatives.
Schal330@lemmy.world 1 day ago
it is useful as a sort of better google, like for things that are documented but reading the documentation makes your head hurt so you can ask it to dumb it down to get the core concept and go from there
I agree with this point so much. I’m probably a real thicko, and being able to use it to explain concepts in a different way or provide analogies has been so helpful for my learning.
I hate the impact from use of AI, and I hope that we will see greater efficiencies in the near future so there is less resource consumption.
ViatorOmnium@piefed.social 1 day ago
This is one of the cases where AI is worse. LLMs will generate the tests based on how the code works and not how it is supposed to work. Granted lots of mediocre engineers also use the “freeze the results” method for meaningless test coverage, but at least human beings have ability to reflect on what the hell they are doing at some point.
JoeBigelow@lemmy.ca 1 day ago
I think machine learning has a vast potential in this area, specifically things like running iterative tests in a laboratory, or parsing very large data sets. But a fuckin LLM is not the solution. It makes a nice translation layer, so I don’t need to speak and understand bleep bloop and can tell it what I want in plain language. But after that LLM seems useless to me outside of fancy search uses. It’s should be the initial processing layer to figure out what type of actual AI (ML) to utilize to accomplish the task. I just want an automator that I can direct in plain language, why is that not what’s happening? I know that I don’t know enough to have an opinion but I do anyway!
kameecoding@lemmy.world 1 day ago
I’d be interested what you mean by this? Isn’t all unit tests just freezing the result? A method is an algorithm for certain inputs you expect certain outputs, you unit tests these inputs and matching outputs, and add coverage for edge cases because it’s cheap to do with unit tests and these “freeze the results” or rather lock them in so you know that piece of code always works as expected or it’s “frozen/locked in”
RamRabbit@lemmy.world 17 hours ago
It is pretty common to write unit tests for functionality that doesn’t exist (test driven development). ‘freezing the results’ is ok, as long as you know the results are currently correct. The AI has no way of knowing this and poor programmers often don’t verify either.
It is very easy to write a shit test.
kameecoding@lemmy.world 13 hours ago
Oh yeah for sure, I have seen tests that are pretty useless, for me the way I do it is I write the first one or two tests then instruct copilot to follow the patterns and then it does well, ofc I have to double check it, but reading is easier than having to write it.
kameecoding@lemmy.world 1 day ago
You can tell it to generate based on how it’s supposed to work you know
Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 1 day ago
You could have it write unit tests as black box tests, where you only give it access to the function signature. Though even then, it still needs to understand what the test results should be, which will vary from case to case.