As soon as Apple announced its plans to inject generative AI into the iPhone, it was as good as official: The technology is now all but unavoidable. Large language models will soon lurk on most of the world’s smartphones, generating images and text in messaging and email apps. AI has already colonized web search, appearing in Google and Bing. OpenAI, the $80 billion start-up that has partnered with Apple and Microsoft, feels ubiquitous; the auto-generated products of its ChatGPTs and DALL-Es are everywhere. And for a growing number of consumers, that’s a problem.

Rarely has a technology risen—or been forced—into prominence amid such controversy and consumer anxiety. Certainly, some Americans are excited about AI, though a majority said in a recent survey, for instance, that they are concerned AI will increase unemployment; in another, three out of four said they believe it will be abused to interfere with the upcoming presidential election. And many AI products have failed to impress. The launch of Google’s “AI Overview” was a disaster; the search giant’s new bot cheerfully told users to add glue to pizza and that potentially poisonous mushrooms were safe to eat. Meanwhile, OpenAI has been mired in scandal, incensing former employees with a controversial nondisclosure agreement and allegedly ripping off one of the world’s most famous actors for a voice-assistant product. Thus far, much of the resistance to the spread of AI has come from watchdog groups, concerned citizens, and creators worried about their livelihood. Now a consumer backlash to the technology has begun to unfold as well—so much so that a market has sprung up to capitalize on it.


Obligatory “fuck 99.9999% of all AI use-cases, the people who make them, and the techbros that push them.”

  • Rozaŭtuno
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    6 months ago

    Good thing about this is it’s self selecting, all the technobros who obsess over AI will find themselves bankrupted like when the blockchain bubble bursted.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      6 months ago

      The blockchain bubble burst because everyone with a brain could see from the start that it wasn’t really a useful technology. AI actually does have some advantages so they won’t go completely bust as long as they don’t go completely mad and start declaring that it can do things it can’t do.

      • Rozaŭtuno
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        6 months ago

        they won’t go completely bust as long as they don’t go completely mad and start declaring that it can do things it can’t do.

        Which is exactly what’s happening.

        • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          5 months ago

          The fact that it is useful technology though means they’ll always have a fullback. It’s not going to go way like bitcoin I guarantee it.

          • technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            Bitcoin went away? It’s at like $67k today. Personally I prefer sustainable cryptos but unfortunately Bitcoin is far from dead.

            And sure, there’s lots of data processing and statistics that’s extremely useful. That’s been the case for a long time. But anybody talking about “intelligence” is a con.

            • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              5 months ago

              GameStop also went up. It doesn’t mean GameStop is a good company that’s valuable to own, it just means that dumb people will buy things without value if they think they can eventually pass the bag to someone else. If someone purchased every share of Amazon they’d own a massive asset that would continually produce value for them. If someone bought every outstanding Bitcoin, it both wouldn’t produce ongoing value, but the value would actually go to zero.

      • Sonori@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Like say, treating a program that shows you the next most likely word to follow the previous one on the internet like it is capable of understanding a sentence beyond this is the most likely string of words to follow the given input on the internet. Boy it sure is a good thing no one would ever do something so brainless as that in the current wave of hype.

        It’s also definitely becuse autocompletes have made massive progress recently, and not just because we’ve fed simpler and simpler transformers more and more data to the point we’ve run out of new text on the internet to feed them. We definitely shouldn’t expect that the field as a whole should be valued what it was say back in 2018, when there were about the same number of practical uses and the foucus was on better programs instead of just throwing more training data at it and calling that progress that will continue to grow rapidly even though the amount of said data is very much finite.