General Discussion

ABC123Easy

(278 posts)

50. Don't see how that's "stirring the pot"

Reply to Joinfortmill (Original post)

Sun Mar 29, 2026, 01:49 PM

23 hrs ago

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

1 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Scrivener7

89 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

So, I'm gonna stir the pot a bit... don't be too harsh... [View all] Joinfortmill Yesterday OP

Its a loaded gun, given to a child. Swede Yesterday #1

AI is simply a change accelerant to make the wealthy wealthier more quickly Tim S Yesterday #2

Best explanation of it I've heard so far Walleye Yesterday #3

Except this time genxlib Yesterday #10

Elon Musk promises an age of abundance thought crime Yesterday #23

Elitist billionaires... Safe as Milk 23 hrs ago #53

I believe he said that is one possible path genxlib 23 hrs ago #57

Even Elmo doesn't know what he has in mind. paleotn 22 hrs ago #70

Oh dear lord. Not this shit again. paleotn 22 hrs ago #64

I hope you are right genxlib 21 hrs ago #73

We already have near humanoid robots... paleotn 21 hrs ago #75

Thanks for the interesting links - bookmarking. jmbar2 20 hrs ago #88

Well, that describes the market. thought crime Yesterday #37

Yup. orangecrush Yesterday #46

Ha! I think I could do better stirring, but I'll pass. BootinUp Yesterday #4

I'd take one of these leftstreet Yesterday #5

Of course, that video was made with AI thought crime Yesterday #26

How about AI is like fire, and has to be controlled FullySupportDems Yesterday #6

Exactly. anciano Yesterday #7

I agree. But it has to have some (considerable regulatory) constraints hlthe2b Yesterday #8

A LOT of constraints! n/t Safe as Milk 23 hrs ago #56

Seems like a... 2naSalit Yesterday #9

It's much better and safer than Google gulliver Yesterday #11

I have yet to find a single AI summary which is accurate. Ms. Toad Yesterday #15

It's better for the AI to tell you about your symptoms than Google gulliver Yesterday #16

It is absolutely NOT better for AI to tell you about your symptoms than Google Ms. Toad 21 hrs ago #76

The trouble with Wiki isn't that it spouts false information on a regular basis. Igel Yesterday #18

Agreed - but it took me until the last paragraph to get the AI connection. Ms. Toad 21 hrs ago #79

I've found many accurate responses from AI summary thought crime Yesterday #28

Those AI overviews are stealing traffic from the websites they stole the information from, and the highplainsdem Yesterday #35

And you've fact checked every bit of its response? Ms. Toad 21 hrs ago #78

A Substantial Majority Of The Time... ProfessorGAC 20 hrs ago #89

A coworker used AI to get a second opinion from his doctor's. Shermann Yesterday #41

I have a long history of correcting doctors with independent research. Ms. Toad 21 hrs ago #81

Anthropic Claude is very accurate. milestogo Yesterday #42

It still hallucinates. All genAI models do. It can hallucinate at any time, and for that reason its highplainsdem Yesterday #47

Define accurate. paleotn 22 hrs ago #65

I haven't specifically checked it myself - Ms. Toad 21 hrs ago #77

And current LLMs do exactly the same thing as Google search or YouTube algorithms. You just don't realize it. paleotn 22 hrs ago #66

While I agree, in principle as to the possibilities for it's use, Ms. Toad Yesterday #12

"AI relies on the stolen works of humans (art and writing)..." mike_c 20 hrs ago #86

Without planning and guardrails... Happy Hoosier Yesterday #13

AI doesn't concern me as much... biocube Yesterday #14

You aren't wrong ... BUT KentuckyWoman Yesterday #17

Of course it is, Disaffected Yesterday #19

If you mean generative AI, the kind most hyped now, it's badly flawed tech based on stolen intellectual property, highplainsdem Yesterday #20

Very true statement mgardener Yesterday #21

Absolutely. It's a key tool of production. David__77 Yesterday #22

It works - to the extent it works when it's mindless and will always hallucinate - only because of IP theft. highplainsdem Yesterday #29

I guess that depends on one's view of "intellectual property". David__77 Yesterday #32

The AI companies who felt they had a right to take everyone else's IP have been quick to scream if highplainsdem Yesterday #40

That's absolutely true and on a certain level funny to see. David__77 21 hrs ago #82

I'm in favor of creatives owning their intellectual property, and that right being protected. It's as highplainsdem 21 hrs ago #84

That can certainly be adjudicated as with any other property issue. David__77 20 hrs ago #85

Legal judgments aren't always ethical, as everyone here is aware. Creatives and those who support highplainsdem 20 hrs ago #87

A.I. got us Donald Trump in 2024. Nuff said. Botany Yesterday #24

Wish AI meant actual (human) intelligence. BattleRow 23 hrs ago #49

AI is the devil. We think we can control it, but we can't. Scrivener7 Yesterday #25

Devil with the Blue Dress? She's the Devil in disguise? thought crime Yesterday #31

The problem is not a fork or a knife, the problem is who has it in their hand...An assassin with a knife is very Escurumbele Yesterday #27

"Guns aren't the problem..." ? thought crime Yesterday #33

An accurate analogy, however dlk Yesterday #30

I agree. I've been saying this about computers for decades. However, I think most of us agree that IA should be Martin68 Yesterday #34

I think it sound like a scream.AAAAA.IIIIII... MiHale Yesterday #36

The problem is not how we use it, Mblaze Yesterday #38

The most critical word is "you" -- meaning WHO? Martin Eden Yesterday #39

If it were only looked as a fork Javaman Yesterday #43

We are about to FAFO on AI. LudwigPastorius Yesterday #44

True, AI by itself is benign. The companies controlling it, however, are not. tinrobot Yesterday #45

hmmm...almost 50 replies and no interaction... ret5hd 23 hrs ago #48

I sometimes stir a pot in the kitchen and then walk away until dinner is served Soul_of_Wit 22 hrs ago #60

Don't see how that's "stirring the pot" ABC123Easy 23 hrs ago #50

I do agree with you there. One of my smartest friends, a tech professional, thinks like Joinformill. Scrivener7 23 hrs ago #55

It's a tool for the billionaire overlords, not for us FakeNoose 23 hrs ago #51

Where was our blue ribbon commission prior to its release. Prairie_Seagull 23 hrs ago #52

AI can be rejected - and should be, by ethical, smart people who have any choice in the matter. highplainsdem 22 hrs ago #59

Granted that using genAI is optional and can be rejected..... anciano 22 hrs ago #62

It's genAI being hyped and used most widely. Which is why people need to know about how harmful highplainsdem 22 hrs ago #63

The sole cat I ever had agreed with you. Prairie_Seagull 21 hrs ago #83

Not like a fork: like a cruise missle with a spork instead of a warhead. JustABozoOnThisBus 23 hrs ago #54

Two huge negatives, both related to human nature Soul_of_Wit 23 hrs ago #58

In addition, we need... cornball 24 22 hrs ago #61

And using AI harms human intelligence. See this thread on yet another article about that: highplainsdem 22 hrs ago #67

That's very simple Renew Deal 22 hrs ago #68

Sadly, few people are fully able to tell when AI provides facts or fallacies. MineralMan 22 hrs ago #69

This is absolutely true! Oneironaut 22 hrs ago #71

AI differs from a fork in that a fork does not PufPuf23 22 hrs ago #72

americans can't be trusted with sharp objects bigtree 21 hrs ago #74

AI cannot replace humans Progressive dog 21 hrs ago #80