What are your thoughts on Generative Machine Learning models? Do you like them? Why? What future do you see for this technology?
What about non-generative uses for these neural networks? Do you know of any field that could use such pattern recognition technology?
I want to get a feel for what are the general thoughts of Lemmy Users on this technology.
Using AI like Deepseek is a lot easier than shifting through 50 search results, if the question is for a relatively new technology though then it usually doesn’t work
As of now its overblown. Still a useful tool tho. Ive been using deepseek to help with resume formatting. Just dont let them do any actual writing for you or theyll make shit up. But for formatting theyre great. Feed it what you wrote, and ask to to clean it up without changing the text. Re read it to make sure it didnt change stuff anyway. Its also great at things like troubleshooting issues. Way better then just googling it. You can still run into hallucinations tho so be careful. I also reccomend avoiding any western AI and only use chinese AI. Its better and safer.
I think it’s fine if used in moderation. I use mine for doing the mindless day-to-day stuff like writing cover letters or business-type emails. I don’t use it for anything creative though, just to free myself up to do that stuff.
I also suck at coding so I use it to write little scripts and stuff. Or at least to do the framework and then I finish them off.
It’s bullshit. It’s inauthentic. It can be useful for chewing through data, but even then the output can’t be trusted. The only people I’ve met who are absolutely thrilled by it are my bosses, who are two of the most frustrating, stupid, pig-headed, petty people I’ve ever met. I wish it would go away. I’m quitting my job next week, taking a big paycut and barely being able to pay the bills, specifically because those two people are unbearable. They also insist that I use AI as much as possible.
Most GenAI was trained on material they had no right to train on (including plenty of mine). So I’m doing my small part, and serving known AI agents an infinite maze of garbage. They can fuck right off.
Now, if we’re talking about real AI, that isn’t just a server park of disguised markov chains in a trenchcoat, neural networks that weren’t trained on stolen data, that’s a whole different story.
I like to think somewhere researchers are working on actual AI and the AI has already decided that it doesn’t want to read bullshit on the internet
It’s a tool with some interesting capabilities. It’s very much in a hype phase right now, but legitimate uses are also emerging. Automatically generating subtitles is one good example of that. We also don’t know what the plateau for this tech will be. Right now there are a lot of advancements happening at rapid pace, and it’s hard to say how far people can push this tech before we start hitting diminishing returns.
For non generative uses, using neural networks to look for cancer tumors is a great use case https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9904903/
Another use case is using neural nets to monitor infrastructure the way China is doing with their high speed rail network https://interestingengineering.com/transportation/china-now-using-ai-to-manage-worlds-largest-high-speed-railway-system
DeepSeek R1 appears to be good at analyzing code and suggesting potential optimizations, so it’s possible that these tools could work as profilers https://simonwillison.net/2025/Jan/27/llamacpp-pr/
I do think it’s likely that LLMs will become a part of more complex systems using different techniques in complimentary ways. For example, neurosymbolics seems like a very promising approach. It uses deep neural nets to parse and classify noisy input data, and then uses a symbolic logic engine to operate on the classified data internally. This addresses a key limitation of LLMs which is the ability to do reasoning in a reliable way and to explain how it arrives at a solution.
Personally, I generally feel positively about this tech and I think it will have a lot of interesting uses down the road.
Let me know when we have some real AI to evaluate rather than products labeled as a marketing ploy. Anyone remember when everything had to be called “3D” because it was cool? I missed my chance to get 3D stereo cables.
I would probably be a bit more excited if it didn’t start coming out during a time of widespread disinformation and anti-intellectualism.
I just come here to share animal facts and similar things, and the amount of reasonably realistic AI images and poorly compiled “fact sheets”, and recently also passable videos of non-real animals is very disappointing. It waters down basic facts as it blends in to more and more things.
Stuff like that is the lowest level of bad in the grand scheme of things. I don’t even like to think of the intentionally malicious ways we’ll see it be used. It’s a going to be the robocaller of the future, but not just spamming our landlines, but everything. I think I could live without it.
As a tool for reducing our societal need to do hard labor I think it is incredibly useful. As it is generally used in America I think it is an egregious from of creative theft that threatens to replace a large range of the working class in our nation.
-
I don’t think it’s useful for a lot of what it’s being promoted for—its pushers are exploiting the common conception of software as a process whose behavior is rigidly constrained and can be trusted to operate within those constraints, but this isn’t generally true for machine learning.
-
I think it sheds some new light on human brain functioning, but only reproduces a specific aspect of the brain—namely, the salience network (i.e., the part of our brain that builds a predictive model of our environment and alerts us when the unexpected happens). This can be useful for picking up on subtle correlations our conscious brains would miss—but those who think it can be incrementally enhanced into reproducing the entire brain (or even the part of the brain we would properly call consciousness) are mistaken.
-
Building on the above, I think generative models imitate the part of our subconscious that tries to “fill in the banks” when we see or hear something ambiguous, not the part that deliberately creates meaningful things from scratch. So I don’t think it’s a real threat to the creative professions. I think they should be prevented from generating works that would be considered infringing if they were produced by humans, but not from training on copyrighted works that a human would be permitted to see or hear and be affected by.
-
I think the parties claiming that AI needs to be prevented from falling into “the wrong hands” are themselves the most likely parties to abuse it. I think it’s safest when it’s open, accessible, and unconcentrated.
-
What do you think about what are your thoughts on AI?
No. It is an unneeded waste of resources spent by anti-human perverts.
The actual purpose is to parse surveillance data for the capitalist class.
The pushback against genAI’s mostly reactionary moral panic with (stupid|misinformation|truth stretching) talking points , such’s :
- AI art being inherently “plagiarising”
- AI using as much energy’s crypto , the AI = crypto mindset in general
- AI art “having no soul” , .*
- “Peops use AI to do «BAD THING» , therefour AI ISZ THE DEVILLLL ‼‼‼”
- .*
Any legitimate criticisms sadly drowned out by this bollocks , can’t trust anti AI peops to actually criticise the tech . Am bitter
AI art being inherently “plagiarising”
Yes it is, simply due to the nature of the “training”/“learning” process, which is learning in name alone. If you know how this mathematical process works you know the machine’s definition of success is how well it’s output matches the data it was trained with. The machine is effectively trying to encrypt it’s data base on it’s nodes. I would recommend you inform yourself on how the “training” process actually works, down to the mathematical level.
AI using as much energy’s crypto , the AI = crypto mindset in general
AI is often push by the same people who pushed NFTs and whatnot, so this is somewhat understandable. And yes, AI consumes a lot of energy and water. Maybe not as much as crypto, but still, not something we can afford to use for mindless entertainment in our current climate catastrophe.
AI art “having no soul”
Yup. AI “art” works by finding pixel patterns that repeat with a given token. Due to it’s nature, it can only repeat patterns which it identified in it’s training data. Now, we have all heard of the saying “An image in worth a thousand words”. This saying is quite the understatement. For one to describe an image down to the last detail, such detail that someone who never saw the image could perfectly replicate it, one how need more than a thousand words, as evidenced by computer image files, since these are basically what was just described. The training data never has enough detail to describe the whole image in such detail and therefore it is incapable of doing anything too specific.
Art is very personal, the more of yourself you put into a piece, the more unique and “soulful” it will be. The more of the work you delegate to the machine, the less of yourself you can put into the piece, and if 100% of the image generation was made by the machine, which is in turn simply calculating an average image that matches the prompt, then nothing of you is in the piece. It is nothing more than the maths that created it.
Simple text descriptions do not give the human meaningful control over the final piece, and that is why pretty much any artist worth their tittle is not using it.
Also, the irony that we are automating the arts, something which people enjoy doing, instead of the soul degrading jobs nobody wants to do, should not be lost on us.
“Peops use AI to do «BAD THING» , therefour AI ISZ THE DEVILLLL ‼‼‼”
It is true that AI is being used in horrible was that will take sometime to adapt, it is simply that the negative usages of AI have more visibility than the positive usages. As a matter of fact, this node network technology was already in use in many fields before the Chat-GPT induced AI hype train.
can’t trust anti AI peops to actually criticise the tech
Correct. It is well known that those who stem to financially benefit from the success of AI are more than willing to lie about it’s true capabilities.
