• rtxnM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 days ago

    That saying (or, dare I say, thought-terminating cliché) glosses over the consideration of risks and costs that result from its uncritical usage. No sane person should trust it without serious reservations just because it fits the purpose, and that’s true whether or not it bears the latest combination of letters peddled by tech bros. It’s a dangerous, irresponsible mentality. It’s a tool the same way a sledgehammer made out of plutonium is a tool.

    • bitjunkie
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      8 days ago

      Plutonium sledgehammer sounds fucking awesome though

      • AnyOldName3
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        8 days ago

        Pretty effective because of its high density, too. It’s a shame it’s brittle and would give you heavy metal poisoning.

            • AnyOldName3
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 days ago

              Unless you pick a particularly short-lived isotope, the radiation wouldn’t have time to hurt you before you died of regular heavy metal poisoning like you’d get from something boring like lead or mercury.

    • Zephyr@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      7 days ago

      I mean in an old nuclear bomb that’s pretty much the situation. Use a conventional explosive to slam some plutonium like a sledgehammer and nukes have proven to be a strong deterrent when a country had them. Still a tool with a use case

    • Franconian_Nomad@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      8 days ago

      Your comment is a sweeping statement that is thought terminating itself.

      No sane person should trust it without serious reservations just because it fits the purpose

      Using a tool for something it’s intended for automatically involves some thought process. And this thought process also involves its limitations and potential for danger.

      Your criticism stems from your dislike for AI and your opinion that it’s generally not useful. An opinion that is shared widely here, but with little to no proof at all.