Comment on China's new and cheaper magic beans shock America's unprepared magic bean salesmen

• teawrecks@sopuli.xyz ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

  Yeah, I agree that in the long term those two sentiments are inconsistent, but in the short term we have to deal with allegedly misguided layoffs, and worse user experiences, which I think makes both fair to criticise. Maybe firing everyone and using slop AI will make your company go bankrupt in a few years, and that’s great; in the meantime, employees everywhere can rightfully complain about the slop and the jobs.

  But yeah, I don’t think it’s fair to complain about how “inefficient” an early technology is and also call it “magic beans”.

  source
• Zaleramancer@beehaw.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

  Those are only conflicting statements if you believe that the market will not embrace worse products. It totally will so long as you have a group of people who lack the critical analysis skills to compare the products and arrive at the conclusion that the new one is worse.

  It doesn’t help that the potential drivers of this action are massive conglomerates, so if a sweeping change comes from the top-down and is paired with a lot of propaganda (Marketing) then people will have no choice but to accept it as the standard.

  I think that a lot of criticism about the actual quality of AI art is mixed, though. I feel like it has flaws, but I’ve seen arguments about flaws I don’t think are actually real problems with the technical quality.

  source
• CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

  Option A feels mostly like sour grapes to me. Crossover with the humanities and fine arts is significant.

  B is feeling a bit less imminent too, but it wasn’t clear a couple years ago that more compute isn’t all you need. AGI is still bound to happen eventually, seeing as NGI did.

  source
• leftytighty@slrpnk.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

  are those competing?

  It’s being rushed to market and is still very inefficient, but part of the reason it’s being rushed to market is because companies are getting ahead of themselves about the opportunity to fire human employees.

  source

  • Eyekaytee@aussie.zone ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

    companies are getting ahead of themselves about the opportunity to fire human employees

    But then if they produce garbage with AI people will buy the non-garbage product

    Either it produces something of value or it doesn’t, if it’s producing garbage, lowering output, etc then it’s not a threat to our jobs because most people don’t like garbage, if it’s producing genuine value then it will be.

    source

    • leftytighty@slrpnk.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

      Early cars weren’t a threat to streetcars and trains and urban planning but modern cars have reshaped every North American city. You can criticize the inefficiency, poor quality, energy waste, etc. of the technology today while also pointing out the dangers of tomorrow.

      source

      • Eyekaytee@aussie.zone ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

        But cars have always had value, we’re talking under an article that calls AI “magic beans”

        How could magic beans which produce garbage enslave humanity under capitalism? Would you argue that cars which replaced horses as the primary mode of transport in a few years be called this?

        You can argue that AI does some things badly, it’s still very very early on and the progress people are making is insane, like nothing I’ve seen before, but you can’t argue it is worthless and a giant threat to us at the same time, this is contradictory

        source

        • -> View More Comments
• LukeZaz@beehaw.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

  Can’t say I’ve seen B anywhere. All I’ve seen is “tech billionaire CEOs want LLMs to take all our jobs and turn us into slaves,” not so much belief that they can. Perhaps you’re misinterpreting?

  source