• VerbFlow@lemmy.worldOPM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    13 days ago

    Oh. Well then, replace “AI” with “generative AI”. I may have been a bit confused there. In that case, we are perfectly fine without generative AI, and it has guzzled resources and manpower. For such a cost, what is the return? You can look at this Hill article, or you can look at fake studies, or other ways GenAI has been harmful. Stuff like the A* search algorithm didn’t require jumbo subsidies for it to work properly, and it isn’t making the internet as it is worse.

    So that’s what I’m saying. I have yet to find an argument proving, successfully, that generative AI is worth the cost.

    • MellowSnow@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      13 days ago

      Yeah, I definitely agree with the sentiment. I try to evangelize the fact that Gen AI !== AI because AI as a whole has a ton of amazing benefits at low cost. And it’s way more prevalent than people realize. But I don’t disagree that Gen AI has been appropriated for some of the dumbest shit ever that costs an arm and a leg to create. A* is a good example of what I was referring to in my original comment. Simple, effective, useful. That being said, I’m sure even Gen AI could have some worthwhile benefits if used in better ways, but it sure does seem like we can’t have many nice things as of late (2024) 🙃