I’ve found that AI has done literally nothing to improve my life in any way and has really just caused endless frustrations. From the enshitification of journalism to ruining pretty much all tech support and customer service, what is the point of this shit?

I work on the Salesforce platform and now I have their dumbass account managers harassing my team to buy into their stupid AI customer service agents. Really, the only AI highlight that I have seen is the guy that made the tool to spam job applications to combat worthless AI job recruiters and HR tools.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    35 hours ago

    Regardless of how useful some might find it, there isn’t a single use case that justifies the environmental cost (not to mention the societal cost). None. Stop using it. You were able to survive and function without it 2 years ago, and you still can.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      4
      edit-2
      2 hours ago

      Then the use of AI advancements in medicine is right out then too? I pretty sure the radiologist that has looked at my MRI this past week looking for lung damage, (thanks long covid!), used it in some form. And my Wife’s upcoming mammogram will also use some form of AI to assist in diagnosis. Or the scheduling department for these appointments that used their own type of AI to manage 1000’s of appointments per month and year. And this is just one example where AI is quickly becoming indispensable.

      AI can be tremendously useful for somethings and useless for other things. Painting with such a large brush like you do makes you no better than those tech bros who push AI for everything to make it all more impressive sounding.

      Carp: edit for missed letter

    • @ClamDrinker
      link
      54 hours ago

      This is like saying you can’t play video games because it costs electricity and you can go without. You can say it about literally everything that isn’t strictly necessary to live. AI isn’t just LLMs and only LLMs have a high environmental cost, and unless you are literally wasting the output like the big tech companies are, even that can be justified for the right reasons.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        4
        edit-2
        2 hours ago

        Hey man, why are we using the internet, don’t you see this is bad for the environment, while your at it. stop wearing clothes! Our ancestors were able to get by with just our body hair, we’re ruining nature.

        That’s how I read the post above you.

        • @ClamDrinker
          link
          3
          edit-2
          2 hours ago

          Yes, exactly. And I don’t even disagree with making things better on the environment. It’s why I dislike LLMs being pushed into random things that don’t really need it. And if more efficient models exist, they should preferably be used.

          But using AI to make your life a little better also brings positives that outweigh that cost. And it seems like as a society we have much bigger polluters to take care of that use orders more electricity and water, and we already struggle massively doing just that. So it really feels like misdirected anger towards the unfairness in society (which the societal cost they mentioned also seems to point to) than a real criticism of AI. And I can understand that anger, but not the mindset behind the conclusions derived from it.

        • @lightsblinken
          link
          0
          edit-2
          2 hours ago

          sounds like a frog in a saucepan… sure is getting warmer!

          • @ClamDrinker
            link
            32 hours ago

            The earth has been warming for decades at this point, even before AI. We know what causes climate change and AI has so far been a footnote on a large list of unsolved problems. The moment that changes I’ll be right there with you, but I’m far more interested in taking down the companies that are largely responsible for it. This logic follows that just living life as a human is unethical because you can’t be environmentally neutral in today’s society, and I reject that notion.

            • @lightsblinken
              link
              02 hours ago

              its the speed of the change innit. for example, the fact that google power requirements has increase 50% in the last year must have a tremendous impact.

              • @ClamDrinker
                link
                22 hours ago

                And Google as one of the largest companies in the world should be held fully responsible for that. But Google isn’t everyone. Google also has a huge amount of computers under their name, but does that mean everyone with a computer should be held to the same standards because it’s the same technology?

                If sweeping conclusions are going to be made about the technology, it has to be looked at outside of the context of a specific company and how they implement and use AI. Otherwise, it should be specified that this is a criticism of specific companies and how they use AI, and I’d be totally there agreeing with you in the case of Google.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            22 hours ago

            yeah, but it’s all about how we use the technology. because we can absolutely find a solution to our climate problem by using what we have today. Tech is definitely a double edged sword and we’re just using it wrong. all because of greed and corruption. And that’s what we definitely need to solve, greed and corruption, and not go all Pol Pot on tech.