Comment on OpenAI Is A Bad Business

• circuscritic@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  It’s not a peer-reviewed journal or academic level source, and shouldn’t be used as that.

  But if I need to find some technical or scientific writings on a subject, but I don’t know the correct nomenclature or need a more narrow set of keywords, that is something I can describe to the LLM and get back.

  The keywords in their response can help me then hunt down the journal article or papers that I need using traditional search engines. I’m not just brainstorming here, this is something I do often enough to find real utility in it.

  Again, is it all problems that can be solved with traditional search engines, but at the cost of time and frustration sifting though every potential result.

  source

  • hitmyspot@aussie.zone ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    Yes, but for the average user, if it confidently gives misinformation, then its worse than a search engine. It is removing the verification step of reading the source, seospam aside. The whole business model is on using it more, not selectively.

    One thing the article leaves out is the costs of processing should go down over time. Hopefully, as power transitions,.it also becomes more sustainable. However, it starts to become a bit like uber and self driving cars. How long can they burn through other peoples money to undercut competitions until the actual plan becomes profitable.

    source

    • circuscritic@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      I’m not advocating for openai, their business model, or the environmental and financial cost benefit of current LLM technology.

      They suck, it’s dogshit, and it’s not worth cooking to planet.

      I also don’t disagree about the very real possibility that the average user may actually get dumber and more misinformed by relying on LLMs.

      But we’re on Lemmy, and I’m just tired of all these comments incessantly complaining about about how LLM’s can’t do x,y, or z.

      Imagine being on a carpentry forum, and every day people complained about how their new belt sander was dogshit at cutting 2x4’s or screwing in fasteners, so clearly the problem was with concept belt sander technology.

      source

      • EldritchFeminity@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

        In your example, the thing missing is that the belt sander companies are selling their belt sanders as screw fastening, band saw multitools.

        I always say about AI that it’s not the tool but who’s making it and why, and this is especially true for the average person. Your average person isn’t seeing the LLMs that are trained to identify anomalies in MRIs or iterate on chemical formulas to improve drugs in a simulation that takes milliseconds compared to the months of research it would take technicians to replicate the same experiments. So all they can talk about is the AI that is in their face all day, every day, as every company in the world tries to shoehorn it into their product somehow. And so they complain about the belt sanders that the company told them would fasten their screws and cut their 2x4’s.

        The only way the complaining is going to stop is when the bubble bursts and these companies have to find a new way to chase the infinite profit pipedream.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
      • hitmyspot@aussie.zone ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

        Oh, certainly LLMs are here to stay. Hopefully, they become conmoditised very quickly. But also, hopefully, the bubble bursts quickly too. Shoehorning AI into everything is dogshit. Actually using it for select reasons, where it is successful, should be great.

        Already we have things like customer support phone trees that try to get rid of user interaction with scripts. AI here could be great to improve them. What’s more likely is as the tech improves, more companies use AI rather than peioke for customer support, lol. Its dystopian.

        The difference, of course, is the belt sander is not purporting to be able to screw fasten. Nor will it with a future update or subscription.

        source