←back to thread

Add "fucking" to your Google searches to neutralize AI summaries

(gizmodo.com)
788 points jsheard | 2 comments | 31 Jan 25 21:20 UTC | HN request time: 0.441s | source
Show context
autoexec ◴[31 Jan 25 23:08 UTC] No.42893484[source]▶
Every time some product or service introduces AI (or more accurately shoves it down our throats) people start looking for a way to get rid of it.

It's so strange how much money and time companies are pouring into "features" that the public continues to reject at every opportunity.

At this point I'm convinced that the endless AI hype and all the investment is purely due to hopes that it will soon put vast numbers of employees out of work and allow companies to use the massive amounts of data they've collected about us against us more effectively. All the AI being shoehorned into products and services now are mostly to test, improve, and advertise for the AI being used, not to provide any value for users who'd rather have nothing to do with it.

replies(34): >>42893546 #>>42893553 #>>42893562 #>>42893575 #>>42893674 #>>42893709 #>>42893714 #>>42893818 #>>42893837 #>>42893917 #>>42893948 #>>42894013 #>>42894084 #>>42894156 #>>42894171 #>>42894341 #>>42894345 #>>42894380 #>>42894607 #>>42894864 #>>42894878 #>>42895079 #>>42895251 #>>42895337 #>>42895352 #>>42895481 #>>42895750 #>>42896211 #>>42896410 #>>42896427 #>>42896655 #>>42896688 #>>42900751 #>>42903277 #
bobxmax ◴[31 Jan 25 23:55 UTC] No.42893948[source]▶
Billions of dollars are being spent on very useful AI.

You just notice the shitty ones, but people on HN thinks that's the norm for some reason.

replies(3): >>42894272 #>>42894404 #>>42896197 #
timewizard ◴[01 Feb 25 00:31 UTC] No.42894272[source]▶
Is the "useful AI" technology any different from this slop? If not then I fear that's wasted money as well. Which I think is the reason this stuff keeps getting shoehorned in. They invested money in training and equipment all of which is depreciating far faster than it has returned value.

I strongly doubt this "dichotomy AI" theory.

replies(1): >>42895241 #
bobxmax ◴[01 Feb 25 03:01 UTC] No.42895241[source]▶
That's demonstrably false unless you believe millions of people are spending their own money every month for useless tech.

I don't know how a thinking person can use this technology and not see the possibilities it opens up.

replies(2): >>42895609 #>>42896206 #
1. timewizard ◴[01 Feb 25 04:20 UTC] No.42895609[source]▶
> unless you believe millions of people are spending their own money every month for useless tech.

Your premise is wrong. You assume these people are spending money creating useful output or would otherwise understand and be able to implement a more efficient means on their own. In the words of David Graeber a lot of people have bullshit jobs, are you sure the "AI" isn't alleviating some other problem for them?

> and not see the possibilities it opens up.

The current technology has no natural exponential growth curve. Which means for a linear increase in spending you get a linear increase in accuracy. Any thinking person should see where this is going. Which is why you should call these LLMs so you don't accidentally fool yourself.

I mean, of course, when AGI does arrive and has a reasonable power budget, then we're talking. The current technology will never become this or anything like this. This will almost certainly lead to a new "AI winter" before AGI happens and will likewise almost certainly not occur during yours or my lifetime.

If you do believe that then I have a self driving battery powered semi to sell you that's fully autonomous and will run road cargo trains for you all day and night for huge profits.

replies(1): >>42897711 #
2. bobxmax ◴[01 Feb 25 11:56 UTC] No.42897711[source]▶
I don't know what the point of your rant was. Nobody is talking about AGI. Even if the technology never evolves again, it's still dramatically useful to the tune of billions and billions of dollars being spent on it.