Proper headline:
“Intelligent People Understand the Limits and Dangers of AI; Unfortunately AI Company Leaders Do Not, and Seek to Silence Opposition”
Marginalized Americans are highly skeptical of artificial intelligence
Submitted 2 weeks ago by Pro@programming.dev to technology@lemmy.world
https://news.umich.edu/marginalized-americans-are-highly-skeptical-of-artificial-intelligence/
Comments
Xulai@mander.xyz 2 weeks ago
lupusblackfur@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
🤣 🤣
Guess I must be one of those “marginalized”…
🤣
ploot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 weeks ago
Makes sense given that AI has been trained on all the prejudiced blatherings of humanity so far, and it just tries to imitate.
DrFistington@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
How do they define ‘marginalized’?
remotelove@lemmy.ca 2 weeks ago
In this study, we conducted a survey (n = 742) including a representative U.S. sample and an oversample of gender minorities, racial minorities, and disabled individuals to examine how demographic factors shape AI attitudes.
DrFistington@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Thanks for the actual response. Personally I think you sample size is way too low, and the selection is skewed towards people that already feel marginalized, which will in turn, skew your results
Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 2 weeks ago
They checked to see whether or not they had Lemmy accounts.
OpenPassageways@programming.dev 2 weeks ago
As skeptical as I am, I’m feeling pressure to join the BS train on this. It’s literally all over LinkedIn… Even though I’m sure it’s all mostly bullshit, it doesn’t matter that I think. What matters is that this is where billionaires are dumping their money so I need to be in a position to get some of it or I may not be able to be gainfully employed in 10 years.
thedruid@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
All Americans are, ya nitwits
Lyra_Lycan@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 weeks ago
The trick is for everyone on the seesaw to move as far away as possible from AI, then it’ll balance or tilt in favour of the people
SunshineJogger@feddit.org 2 weeks ago
I use AI daily and find it useful as a tool. Ut also frustrating in its current state. The disgusting default buttlick responses, trying to please the user with drooping fake polite drool. And then the many, many mistakes.
And it’s a new tool, so yea it need to ripen…
And that means to go all in on a company strategic level of AI as a technology is dumb.
When building a product the problem the product solves is to be the center of the work. Not the technology used to achieve the solution.
Olap@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
I’ve got some bad news for you. They will never fix the mistakes as it cannot reason, it has no actual intelligence. LLMs are already plateauing and are miles away from being trustworthy. And they steal copyrighted work every request
thedruid@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
There it is. Reason. Machines can’t reason. Not one. They can fake it. They can mimic. But they cannot reason and never will
cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de 2 weeks ago
I think just about everyone who is not an executive at a tech company is highly skeptical of AI.
prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 weeks ago
You’d hope, and yet I’ve had people on Lemmy give me shit for being overtly anti-llm
ijedi1234@sh.itjust.works 2 weeks ago
My problem with LLMs is that they’re expert pattern matchers and little else.
Ask them the integral from 1-5 of ln(x) and they’re sure to screw it up.
They’ll give you something that sounds like the right answer, but their explanations are nonsense.
CatsGoMOW@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
I hate that it’s being shoved into anything and everything right now, but saying you’re “overtly anti-llm” seems a bit over dramatic to me. LLMs are a tool like anything else. Used properly and in the right situation, they can be very helpful.
sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 2 weeks ago
There’s a difference between healthy skepticism and invalid, knee-jerk opposition.
LLMs are a useful tool sometimes, and I use them for refining general ideas into specific things to research, and they’re pretty good at that. Sure, what they output isn’t trustworthy on its own, but I can pretty easily verify most of what it spits out, and it does a great job of spitting out a lot of stuff that’s related to what I asked.
For example, I’m a SW dev, so I’ll often ask it stuff like, “compare and contrast popular projects that do X”, and it’ll find a few for me and give easily-verifiable details about each one. Sometimes it’s wrong on one or two details, but it gives me enough to decide which ones I want to look more deeply into. Or I’ll do some greenfield research into a topic I’m not familiar with, and it does a fantastic job of pulling out keywords and other domain-specific stuff that help refine what I search for.
LLMs do a lot less than their proponents claim, but they also do a lot more than detractors claim. They’re a useful tool if you understand the limitations and have a rough idea of how they work. They’re a terrible tool if you buy into the BS coming from the large corps pushing them.
HubertManne@piefed.social 2 weeks ago
I mean there is place in between highly skeptical and anti. I think its a faster and more convenient search as long as it gives sources and it makes creating and editing media easier. I don't like the energy usage and do like work bringing that down. Its just trying to get it to solve things on its own that seems to be pushed when we can clearly see it not working when used like that. I think the biggest issue is its crammed in as a solution and it works in the most half assed manner and they want to say that fine.
HubertManne@piefed.social 2 weeks ago
I was just trying to figure out how to express that exact sentiment. Thank you.