Technology

34868 readers

33 users here now

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.

Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.

Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

106

“AI” Hurts Consumers and Workers -- and Isn’t Intelligent (techpolicy.press)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

52 comments fedilink hide all child comments

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/2811405

"We view this moment of hype around generative AI as dangerous. There is a pack mentality in rushing to invest in these tools, while overlooking the fact that they threaten workers and impact consumers by creating lesser quality products and allowing more erroneous outputs. For example, earlier this year America’s National Eating Disorders Association fired helpline workers and attempted to replace them with a chatbot. The bot was then shut down after its responses actively encouraged disordered eating behaviors. "

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

The black box isn't being done because it's a new idea, it's actually the other way around. The newer idea is actually the method for easier analysis. There's a few reasons that they aren't doing that though.

It's a newer idea, not everything has been studied so methods will be experimental.
It's in the company's interest to make the AI harder to analyze, because they don't want open the door on a better algorithm from a different company/government/group.
It's cheaper up front to build a black box and then do statistical analysis the hard and expensive way. Companies would much rather spend money doing things the wrong way instead of saving money long term doing things the right way.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

If doing it the "wrong way" is cheap and works well, then perhaps it's not the "wrong way."

There are many companies (and researchers and hobbyists now) who are doing this stuff other than OpenAI, at this point. They just broke the ice and showed what was possible.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

I just explained that it's not cheap. It costs far more to buy a cheap car and do constant maintenance than it is to buy the mid tier car without much maintenance. That's what's happening with AI right now, we're buying the cheap car and paying for it in labor and development costs. I'm saying that the right way is to buy the more expensive one, which will be cheaper in the long run.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

There is no agent on the planet who is intentionally choosing to make their models harder to analyze. This is a ridiculous idea that you could only believe if you didn't understand where the complexity comes from in the first place. Creating ML models that can be efficiently and effectively trained and interpreted is an extremely hard and unsolved problem, and whomever could solve it would be rolling in cash.