Re:I got fooled by AI-for-science hype–here's what it taught me
by dvfjsdhgfv on Tuesday May 20, 2025 @05:09PM
(#44045957)
There is no single reason. Nobody will argue that LLMs are already quite useful at some tasks if used properly.
As for the opposing view, there are so many reasons.
* Founders and other people who bet their money on AI try to pump up the hype in spite of problems with delivery
* We know some of them are plainly lying, but the general public doesn't
* They repeat their assumptions as facts ("AI will replace most X and Y jobs by year Z")
* We clearly see that the enormous development of LLMs has plateaued but they try to convince the general public it's the contrary
* We see the difference on how a single individual (Aaron Swartz) is treated when making a small copyright infringement, and how the consequences for AI companies like OpenAI or Meta who copied the whole contents of Libgen are non-existent.
* Some people like me just hate AI slop - in writing and imaging. It just puts me off and I stop reading/watching etc.
As for the opposing view, there are so many reasons.
* Founders and other people who bet their money on AI try to pump up the hype in spite of problems with delivery
* We know some of them are plainly lying, but the general public doesn't
* They repeat their assumptions as facts ("AI will replace most X and Y jobs by year Z")
* We clearly see that the enormous development of LLMs has plateaued but they try to convince the general public it's the contrary
* We see the difference on how a single individual (Aaron Swartz) is treated when making a small copyright infringement, and how the consequences for AI companies like OpenAI or Meta who copied the whole contents of Libgen are non-existent.
* Some people like me just hate AI slop - in writing and imaging. It just puts me off and I stop reading/watching etc.
There are many more points like this.