I do use AI for simple questions, and it works fairly well for that, but this claim by MS is just marketing bullshit.

This is my experience. It can be useful for simple things that used to be found with a web search before AI slop broke things. For example, I was having trouble getting a simple CGO program for a POC to communicate with the main Go process. This should have been solvable easily with documentation but the CGO docs are pretty bad and sample code was near impossible to find due to AI slop in the search results. GPT was able to provide the needed sample code to unblock me.

The only thing that it is really useful for is getting possible solutions for simple problems that don’t pop up in search results anymore because of all of the slop that it was used to generate for scummy advertising dickheads. Even then, it’s not trustworthy and requires verification, wasting time that would not be needed if the official docs came up consistently on the first page of search results.

Thank you. It’s exhausting and cathartic at the same time to call the little shits who go through mental gymnastics to support their anti-electoralism/accelerationism as the literal cause of the current state of the world. Yes, bad actors have been doing bad things but they’re basically just holding the door open for the guy walking up to the house with a can of kerosene and lit blowtorch.

Everyone dies. You just get to try to make the leaderboards, if that’s your thing. There isn’t a killscreen that we know of.

I disagree, it’s a problem because people don’t want to evolve.

Oh. So you’re a social darwinist that believes that they are special enough that they’ll never be in the crosshairs. Great. Here’s hoping that you gain some empathy and a better understanding of human evolutionary and societal history (hint: altruism and caring for others who are unable to provide for themselves is the rule, not the exception).

and means lower costs, see: “reasons people like the march of progress for 100”

Objectively incorrect. The actual costs of AI “art” are astronomically higher than the costs of hiring artists. When was the last time an artist needed a fission reactor and enough potable water to supply a moderately sized city over the course of their lives, much less for the completion of a project?

The corpos running the scam just haven’t made the financial costs to end users align with reality yet. They’re trying to destroy livelihoods and get businesses stuck in vendor lock-in first so that they have no competition when they open the valves of the real costs. Generative AI under this hyper-capitalist regime is a net negative for the species.

Depends on context. If the context is “planning a holiday in El Salvador”, maybe MS-13 is relevant. Beyond being worried about impact on others’ lives, MS-13 is largely irrelevant to Americans and most people that I’ve encountered never heard of them before 2016.

why are you arguing that at me?

Rationally and in vacuum, anthropomorphizing tools and animals is kinda silly and sometimes dangerous. But human brains don’t work do well at context separation and rationality. They are very noisy and prone to conceptual cross-talk.

The reason that this is important is that, as useless as LLMs are at nearly everything they are billed as, they are really good at fooling our brains into thinking that they possess consciousness (there’s plenty even on Lemmy that ascribe levels of intelligence to them that are impossible with the technology). Just like knowledge and awareness don’t grant immunity to propaganda, our unconscious processes will do their own thing. Humans are social animals and our brains are adapted to act as such, resulting in behaviors that run the gamut from wonderfully bizzare (keeping pets that don’t “work”) to dangerous (attempting to pet bears or keep chimps as “family”).

Things that are perceived by our brains, consciously or unconsciously, are stored with associations to other similar things. So the danger here that I was trying to highlight is that being abusive to a tool, like an LLM, that can trick our brains into associating it with conscious beings, is that that acceptability of abusive behavior towards other people can be indirectly reinforced.

Basically, like I said before, one can unintentionally train themselves into practicing antisocial behaviors.

You do have a good point though that people believing that ChatGPT is a being that they can confide in, etc is very harmful and, itself, likely to lead to antisocial behaviors.

that is fucking stupid behavior

It is human behavior. Humans are irrational as fuck, even the most rational of us. It’s best to plan accordingly.

And this is why multidisciplinary education is important.

Yup. Need something like EV certs to really verify… And that would only make sense if it’s a “no (non-real) screennames” kind of thing.

https://youtu.be/VIwC9_VCZCY

I’d argue that showing disdain, aggression, and disrespect in communication with AI/LLM things is more likely to be dangerous as one is conditioning themselves to be disdainful, aggressive, and disrespectful when communicating with the same methods used to communicate with other people. Our brains do a great job at association, so, it’s basically just training oneself to be an asshole.

No.

Unfortunately, the US administrative state is still being murdered. So, don’t expect act regs or enforcement to be seen out of the US and expect flagrant violation of EU and other regs due to mobster-style protectionism.

Right-wingers never agree to annual payouts except for the rich. It’s absolutely a one time thing.

I have to agree with pretty much everything that you’ve said there. Since I don’t use CAD professionally, and I’m not about to suffer through the windows experience voluntarily, I’m pretty much such with FreeCAD and (when I get around to it) CADquery. Hopefully more companies will start supporting Linux and free CAD devs from all the MS fuckery - might even get FreeCAD (or a fork) to be more productive and prioritize things necessary to be competitive for SMB/hobbyists.

I hate the syntax in OpenSCAD. It LOOKS like something object-oriented but it is procedural, causing oh so many footguns, if one expects it to act like OOP.

Oh definitely do. The recent improvements (in the last 1-2 years) have made it much more useable, and sometimes even intuitive.

Depends on your needs. I probably wouldn’t consider it good enough yet for commercial but the improvements on 1.0 take care of pretty much all of my needs. The “free” licenses for Fusion360 and OnShape are garbage and feel like nothing more than attempts to get hobbyists and small businesses locked in before changing terms. Plus, last I checked, they pull the same kinda data vacuum bullshit that social media companies did in their terms - “free” license holders should expect any and all of their work to be resold by the companies for profit.

FreeCAD (for less-organic modeling)