“Young people increasingly don’t appear to be incredibly dumb, survey finds.”
billionaires tell people to love the thing they are trying to get them hooked on so that they can run a rampant monopoly and make some more billions.
If you remove yourself from the equation maybe there is some chance. So if you really love AI, perhaps fuck off.
You shouldn’t trust billionaires at all. Even the “good ones”. You don’t get a billion <insert currency here> net worth without exploiting people
Hungary in 1946.
Zimbabwe in 2008.
Germany 1923.
Even Paul McCartney? 👉👈
Especially Paul McCartney
Life could be hard, but then…
Mess with his monopoly and he’ll send armed men after you.
Really 😲?
You’re absolutely right!
Ask Yoko
my experience, that all my collegues who are aroubd 28-35, use a shitload of ai. younger generation is now using it instead of google search.
That’s because they fucked the google search so that ai is the only thing that gives you what you’re looking for. Eventually. After you’ve argued with it.
At least google’s ai will list the sources it’s allegedly drawing from so you can verify it’s hallucinations live.
Do you think they trust it?
You should ask and report back.
I don’t trust anyone who is impressed by LLMs enough to consider them to be in any way adjacent to intelligence.
You are absolutely right! Should I create a list of people who you should not trust?
Why would that be necessary? They’ll freely and readily identify themselves.
They were responding as an LLM would, as a joke.
OK, I don’t use them. Thanks for the explanation.
How do you define intelligence? If LLMs are not intelligent NO other animal could ever be considered intelligent and many humans in the lower percentiles too. And that percentile is only going up.
I mean, if your argument is just semantics, that’s just… pedantic.
You could draw that line anywhere. The NPCs I play against in a strategy game could be “intelligence.”
You know what people mean. People are talking about ~anthropic cognition, which is clearly not what’s going on in current LLMs. They can do intelligent things, maybe they are an “intelligent” by some definition you define, but they are not even close to animalistic cognition.
You and others here act as if this is some clear cut thing, while actually defining it is extremely hard and everything but clear cut.
I find it scary how many people here are blindly against LMMs directly (not the big companies behind them or whatever) with about as much irrational hate as the people they despise, like Trump. They act the same way. Saying LMMs are not intelligent is so absurd I am not sure how to go forward, such a statement is oozing with bias.
I’m not againt LLMs. They’re usefull tools, and I’ve been tinkering with them since 2021, and generative ML before that. I have one loaded on my desktop pretty much all the time; DeepseekV4 0731 is running, right this second.
I use them all the time. I hack at them as a hobby; I know how useful they can be.
But you’re stopping just short of calling them “alive.” They’re not even close, not even in the same universe. They do tasks with intelligence or some variant of that, but they are not intelligent. And I’m not trying to be pedantic, that is a loaded term that implies cognition and adaptability they do not have.
They’re basically the same thing as weather prediction models, but for text output. They’re just a model.
And I think its very dangerous when people fall into the trap of thinking they are, fundamentally, more than that. That’s the fantasy Altman and such are selling the public, to con them.
Hence, the article above ^. What’s coming out of these leaders’ mouths does not match what people are getting, and they can tell. And that’s because the premise they’re being sold, of “artificial intelligence,” is a lie.
It is not alive, why do you suspect I think that way?
And again, if those LLM are not intelligent we set an extremely high bar that even some humans will not reach. And it only gets higher.
with about as much irrational hate as the people they despise, like Trump.
Thanks for outing yourself. Makes it easy to just skip the conversation and not bother trying to open up a conversation made in bad faith.
Intelligence can be defined as sentience or sapience. LLMs lack both (they just regurgitate information and have neither understanding nor self-awareness).
How can you tell they lack all of these things when people testing it shows these have it? So it appears as if, but you say that is not actually the case. How do you tell?
I can write a bash script in five minutes that will say it’s alive if you ask, does that make it so?
Thanks for proving my point, your service is invaluable.
LLMs are explosively imprecise, statistically luke-warm, grey goo extrusion sphincters. They can’t produce anything novel, at best they can reveal potentially plausible information from the data they were trained on, which then requires proven domain expertise to validate.
Intelligence requires comprehension, a trait LLMs are intrinsically incapable of performing.
Define comprehension then.
Understanding, context[0].
Computers are particularly adept at iteration, and LLMs are an application that leverages this effectively. To wit, I’ll concede LLMs are ‘AI’, where that initialisation represents Accelerated Iteration, or in management as Amplified Incompetence, but as an example of Intelligence, that remains for those who are proud of their lack of the naturally occurring variety.
[0]: to frame a larger memory pool as a ‘context window’ is a misnomer, as context requires understanding and comprehension.
For starters, an LLM wouldn’t even survive in the body of a small insect. They’re incompetent at everything.
Prove me wrong. Make an LLM-powered insect that buys more LLM-powered insects. Have it demonstrate any fitness at all.
If you train an AI to do it, I am sure it would completely destroy nature. It would find “bugs” like getting on an aircraft to reach new areas, teamwork to destroy any enemy etc.
I’m sure it wouldn’t. Prove it, you’re wrong. Existing bugs already do that stuff better. And “if you train it” is doing a lot of heavy lifting, since actual bugs can handle novel situations.
Most people don’t consider animals to have intelligence (outside of some apes) which is why they’re readily used as food.
They’re used as food because that’s how people have been socialized. Nobody would willingly eat a dog, but they would eat a pig. Pigs are more intelligent than dogs.
If you’re old enough you likely learned in school that animals aren’t intelligent or capable of consciousness or self-awareness. None of those things are true.
Trust the parasite class! I mean, what could possibly go wrong, right…?
AI is not making my life easier. My gas is not cheaper. Food is still the 2nd highest spend behind housing. Its just not a thing that people with grass to mow need beyond maybe a better search engine.
I’ve been in IT since 2007 I’ve been with computers since 1994 with a second hand MS DOS.
AI is 100 very good for scientists and people in the medical industry (I don’t know why, but I know they’ve all told me it’s good for them). Outside of the above… Everything else about AI is pointless… It’s just googling things slightly faster than I can google things.
Interestingly, in the medical field, I have seen a few headlines, but, I was talking to a guy who works for Mayo Clinic. His job is literally trying to quantify the effects AI is having with the doctors, and talking with him I said the same thing “at least it’s good for the medical field” and he replied with “who told you that? I would actually love to speak with them.” So, I’m not sure how effective it is in the medical field either.
Very interesting, I work in IT and talked about how useless AI is and I got told off by multiple “scientists” because AI was revolutionising the way they did their research.
Granted this was on Reddit so maybe just people wanting to argue.
Googling things a bit faster, but now all the sites it is searching are AI generated.
Scientists that use AI aren’t likely to remain good scientists for long.
I mainly use it for comparing products, and finding tools/products that fit my needs (sustainability/longevity/value/complexity/learning curve/beginner friendliness). I find it to be really time saving for this particulqr purpose. Customer service agents should be forgotten by history ASAP. EDIT: customer service AI agents, is what I meant
So your use case for LLMs is the first aspect of them that will be enshittified.
LLMs advocating for products that pay them is step 1 of incoming enshittification.
Also, anyone that has ever talked to customer service of any kind knows that the “automated” stuff is the absolute worst and you want a human most of the time.
Prepare to get downvoted and get critical comments. People really hate llms here. It’s just as annoying as the people on the flipside.
While I understand the hate and also somewhat agree with it, there is no denying that it can be useful for some things. If those moments of usefulness are worth the damage to society and environment? Absolutely not. I am however guilty of using it anyway to cut research time ten or twenty times for a few particular use cases.
deleted by creator
Good. Young people are hip to what’s going on and that is uplifting.
I mean, the marketing people should have been able to tell management that too.
Never underestimate me how out of touch business management can be.
There’s a saying- corporate consultants are people who charge millions to tell you what your employees and customers have been trying to tell you for free.
I’m so blackpilled on the average person. These stats mean nothing because the average person not trusting a tech company does absolutely nothing to push them away from it. 80% distrust AI but 50% use it and the stat is growing.
Indeed. The average person seems to need instagram, whatsapp and xitter to fill their meaningless little isolated lives with distractions to feel… something. However on a more positive note, once people get suspicious about AI slop they tend to notice the slop patterns more easily, which is a good development. It’s something that can’t be unseen.
Counterpoint: once they notice some patterns it makes the more gullible for the ones they don’t notice, because “now they can detect AI”.
Possible, but they would more likely see more false positives depending on how suspicious they are… like when people suspected images to be photoshopped in the past.
Fork found in kitchen
Maybe the kids are gonna be alright, after all.
AI is just one of several serious existential threats the kids will have to deal with. They’re far from alright.
“The kids are alright” does not mean that the world where the kids live is alright, it means that the kids are alright. 😅
We got THIS close to being done with nicotine and bullshit in the air in daily life, and then the kids discovered vaping.
At best, the kids are in the aggregate no better or worse than the generations before them. No generation is going to save us from stupid when stupid is part of our species’ DNA.
Bro. The kids are alright. Not pristine perfect beings who will being about a new era of prosperity.
Besides, why you putting it on “the kids discovered vaping”? That sounds like something a billionaire would say to deflect from the huge lobbying campaign they made to distinguish vapes from cigarettes.
Not sure the kids “discovered” vaping, more like the industry did some targeted marketing on them.
To me it means: the kids are healthy and secure, and coping with the world with a reasonable prospect of a good future. But I agree that it’s a good thing that they aren’t entirely duped by the abusers of AI, if that’s what you mean.
The Epstein class is their biggest threat by far. AI and what they do on private islands are just two of many reasons to get rid of billionaires.
I agree. I really don’t understand why society tolerates, let alone promotes and idolizes, billionaires, while median net worth remains below $200,000, and probably much lower in most of the rest of the world. I don’t think everyone should be forced to be exactly equal but the current disparity between median and Elon is more than 6 orders of magnitude, depending on the day of the week, and even to your average barely a billionaire it is more than 3 orders of magnitude. It’s excessive, and looking at how society is going, fairly clearly unhealthy for everyone involved.
Children of the near future will have more in common with the generation before and directly participating in a World War then they do with the generation after a World War.
Anecdotally, all our young family members don’t trust A.I. at all.
Once, I asked it a question as a joke, (I think it was about "Labubu"s or something I’m out of touch about); they told me it sounds like fake news 😂. I asked the tool if we could trust it, and it said something like “no, don’t trust me”, which was hilarious.
I think kids these days have a good bullshit detector, by necessity.
Yesterday I heard an 11yr old - who I’ve witnessed watching AI brain rot content recently - decry that some channel he was shown was “AI slop”, and was incredulous about being shown it. Now I know kids can change their mind very quickly and will just parrot what they hear and think is cool, but it felt good to hear a young kid say this to another, and essentially be mad about it.
If that is true then it only just developed in the last 2 years. There was a huge shift to the right in youth voters, largely because TikTok promoted Trump.
Yeah I’m very skeptical of that comment. Most people have zero critical thinking skills and the youngest generation are the worst of them all so far.
But older people still trust surveys. So no, we’re doomed.
true but kids should also trust AI to be AI
then it becomes a useful tool
never useful, always negative value
As an old person I can also say that old people don’t trust AI, or the leaders of those companies, or the current administration…
Old people were the biggest voter block FOR the current (US) administration. You might not like it, but “old people” certainly have some other opinions.
I’m not monolithic.
You started making claims about what “old people” like or do.
Sorry, I’ve only got this really broad brush. Actually it’s more like a firecracker in a paint tin.
Sure. All people have their own opinions. Grouping people by a specific trait doesn’t give you a monolith that shares the same opinions on everything. There are Blacks, Latinos, Gays, and Trans for Trump.
The comment was refuting the insinuation in the headline that only young people feel this way because older people are stupid and awful. Somehow while trying to appear to be welcoming and not discriminate against minorities, the internet has become full of ageist discrimination. Age is another trait people can’t control or change. Discriminating or mocking people based on that is as wrong as doing the same based on skin color or sexuality.
Older people aren’t stupid and awful, they are just generally more set in their ways, and factually ARE more vulnerable to misinformation and lies, which is why they’re the most vulnerable to scams.
The previous generation, at least in America, was far more repressed and had far less access to information than we do today, which results in more narrow-minded beliefs. Not all old people are like this, but the comment you’re talking about said “old people don’t trust ai” which is not true. Old people as a group do, this person as an individual in that group does not.
Old people as a group don’t exist. There is no monolith based on simple traits like age, or race, or gender. While more members of one specific group sharing any of these traits can be likely to trust or mistrust or agree with anything, boiling them down to a singular opinion or mental state is always wrong. It’s discriminatory.
You saying old people as a group do trust AI is as fucked up as saying that black people as a group do love watermelon.
All groupings are arbitrary, it just (sometimes) provides utility to group on some shared attributes. It would be more accurate to say boomers trust ai more, not because they’re necessarily stupider (though lead poisoning was extremely common through leaded gasoline), but being older does mean you had less access to multiculturalism, less inundation with scams and technology growing up, and more propaganda that is harder to find counterpoints to.
It’s fully accurate to say “older people generally are more close-minded and trust AI more” without that being an attack on any particular old person. That’s a reality old people and young people need to be aware of, whether it’s for an older person to reflect if that’s happening to them, or a younger person to help an older person with.
It’s fully accurate to say “older people generally are more close-minded and trust AI more” without that being an attack on any particular old person.
Depending on the area you live in and the the total range of the statistics it can be fully accurate to say that “black people generally love watermelon and fried chicken and are more likely to steal your bike” and for that to not be an attack on any individual person, but also fuck you. Get it? Just because statistics show a thing doesn’t mean you’re not being a piece of shit for using those statistics to denigrate a massive group of people.
Using statistics chosen because they do denigrate a group of people and then acting like it’s not your fault these are what the statistics show is pretty common from hater assholes towards any group.
It would be more accurate to say boomers trust ai more, not because they’re necessarily stupider (though lead poisoning was extremely common through leaded gasoline)
This one is fantastic, since several studies have come out showing that Gen Z is the first generation to be less cognitively capable than the one that came before it. They don’t even have leaded gasoline to point to as an excuse. Somehow I don’t think they’d be super happy to see the internet flooded with people assuming anyone in that age range is an idiot.
It’s almost like it doesn’t matter what plebs think and we’ve known this for a long time.
or the leaders of those companies
This is key. Zuc put tape over his laptop webcams, cause they know this invasion of privacy is endemic to everything nowadays.
As an old person who knows a lot of old people and has to deal with a lot of other old people, you’re in a bubble. Nothing wrong with that, of course, and you may already be aware.
By and large, early gen X and older have a very difficult time discerning what materials are AI generated. Then when you get to a certain age range, maybe 70+, AI to much of that crowd is just another buzzword they know nothing about.
Now, in the pedantic sense of the word “increasingly”, if literally one more old person is against AI or doesn’t trust AI compared to last year, then that’s increasing. But on the whole, I’m not seeing it. In fact, as AI gets “better” and harder to detect, I’m finding that more people just go with it. You basically end up with camps of “the person who accuses everything of being AI”, “the person who has no clue what’s what and doesn’t care”, and “the person who can’t tell if something is AI regardless of how obvious it is”.
No, that can’t be. The internet has told me that old people are stupid and love Trump and fascism and it’s totally acceptable to mock and hate people based on their age even though they have no control of their age.
The internet assures me it’s a bastion of welcoming care for all, so the hate against old people must be universally deserved. It’s not like the good people of the internet would just latch on to whatever trends they think will be supported and make them look like good people while allowing them to vomit hate at anyone they in their infinite wisdom determine to be bad people.
All my members hate fucking AI and majority of them are over 60. Hell one had me take his payment because he flat out wasn’t going let a clanker take it. Dont trust the automated system rather talk to a human.
My dad died last fall and when I called the funeral home to arrange for his body to be picked up, their answering service was fucking AI. However angry you think that might make you feel, it’s worse than that.
That’s fucked up.
I’m a retired programmer and I always regretted not getting into AI (like, developing it rather than making use of it) because I think I could have made significant contributions. Now I’m glad I never did because I’ll never have to deal with the guilt of having made Terminator a reality.
I’ll just have to deal with Terminator is all. :(
Not even the good Terminator. The future is a robot skeleton humping a parking meter.
I don’t know man, I’m a fairly old person and I’m constantly surrounded by people who seem unable to think without it.
In reviewing your message, it seems like you’ve been faced with some difficulties because of AI. But as young people, I believe AI is the future of humans. We should develop and improve AI in various types of parts, even though the current result is not as good as we expected initially.
With ai hallucinations…Ai fakery and the topmost reason being layoffs being attributed increasingly to AI…I don’t think so there’s anything much to love about AIs. When billionaires tell the society to love something… it’s because there’s 10000% profit for them in that and almost none for us masses.
