2026-04-19 01:02 UTC
Replies (5)
-
@chemical_cutthroat@lemmy.world 2026-04-19 01:11
Lol, I’m not sure what’s worse. Using an LLM to summarize and article for you, or not even reading the article and assuming you know the contents by the title. Fucking people…
-
@EvergreenGuru@lemmy.world 2026-04-19 01:29
They should’ve chosen a lane. OpenAI was about free LLMs, then they went LLC and decided that AI could make money. It doesn’t make money though, so now we’re watching the idiots realize they have burned all this money investing it into AI. All the experts told us it couldn’t do any of the things sci-fi writers love to write stories about. Nothing changed except perception, and with by directing perception they managed to use an old technology to temporarily buttress the economy.
-
@XLE@piefed.social 2026-04-19 04:32
It’s an understandable conclusion if you only read the title of the article. Surely an AI doomer is someone that thinks it’s garbage, right? But if people familiarize themselves with what professional AI doomers look like, and what AI safety groups look like, it becomes abundantly clear that they are all pro-industry. They will only ever criticize AI in ways that covertly praise it on its non-existent capacity.
-
@Iconoclast@feddit.uk 2026-04-19 06:51
Have the comments here read the article? You serious? Ofcourse not - but they did see the letters “AI” in the title.
-
@willington@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2026-04-20 02:06
Have the comments here read the article? It’s arguing that the CEOs themselves have spread the doomer narrative and are now being molotov’d as a result. The CEOs were talking to investors. They didn’t used to care if the proles overheard all that radical signaling intended for investors. I guess now they have a reason to care.