General Discussion

FakeNoose

(41,714 posts)

51. It's a tool for the billionaire overlords, not for us

Sun Mar 29, 2026, 01:50 PM

Mar 29

This is next-generation spying, and once you give them permission by allowing AI aps on your phone or your computer, the spying never stops.

There's a reason why they want to "give" it to us for "free." It will never be free.

Are you OK with that? I'm not.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

1 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Wednesdays

89 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

So, I'm gonna stir the pot a bit... don't be too harsh... [View all] Joinfortmill Mar 29 OP

Its a loaded gun, given to a child. Swede Mar 29 #1

AI is simply a change accelerant to make the wealthy wealthier more quickly Tim S Mar 29 #2

Best explanation of it I've heard so far Walleye Mar 29 #3

Except this time genxlib Mar 29 #10

Elon Musk promises an age of abundance thought crime Mar 29 #23

Elitist billionaires... Safe as Milk Mar 29 #53

I believe he said that is one possible path genxlib Mar 29 #57

Even Elmo doesn't know what he has in mind. paleotn Mar 29 #70

Oh dear lord. Not this shit again. paleotn Mar 29 #64

I hope you are right genxlib Mar 29 #73

We already have near humanoid robots... paleotn Mar 29 #75

Thanks for the interesting links - bookmarking. jmbar2 Mar 29 #88

Well, that describes the market. thought crime Mar 29 #37

Yup. orangecrush Mar 29 #46

Ha! I think I could do better stirring, but I'll pass. BootinUp Mar 29 #4

I'd take one of these leftstreet Mar 29 #5

Of course, that video was made with AI thought crime Mar 29 #26

How about AI is like fire, and has to be controlled FullySupportDems Mar 29 #6

Exactly. anciano Mar 29 #7

I agree. But it has to have some (considerable regulatory) constraints hlthe2b Mar 29 #8

A LOT of constraints! n/t Safe as Milk Mar 29 #56

Seems like a... 2naSalit Mar 29 #9

It's much better and safer than Google gulliver Mar 29 #11

I have yet to find a single AI summary which is accurate. Ms. Toad Mar 29 #15

It's better for the AI to tell you about your symptoms than Google gulliver Mar 29 #16

It is absolutely NOT better for AI to tell you about your symptoms than Google Ms. Toad Mar 29 #76

The trouble with Wiki isn't that it spouts false information on a regular basis. Igel Mar 29 #18

Agreed - but it took me until the last paragraph to get the AI connection. Ms. Toad Mar 29 #79

I've found many accurate responses from AI summary thought crime Mar 29 #28

Those AI overviews are stealing traffic from the websites they stole the information from, and the highplainsdem Mar 29 #35

And you've fact checked every bit of its response? Ms. Toad Mar 29 #78

A Substantial Majority Of The Time... ProfessorGAC Mar 29 #89

A coworker used AI to get a second opinion from his doctor's. Shermann Mar 29 #41

I have a long history of correcting doctors with independent research. Ms. Toad Mar 29 #81

Anthropic Claude is very accurate. milestogo Mar 29 #42

It still hallucinates. All genAI models do. It can hallucinate at any time, and for that reason its highplainsdem Mar 29 #47

Define accurate. paleotn Mar 29 #65

I haven't specifically checked it myself - Ms. Toad Mar 29 #77

And current LLMs do exactly the same thing as Google search or YouTube algorithms. You just don't realize it. paleotn Mar 29 #66

While I agree, in principle as to the possibilities for it's use, Ms. Toad Mar 29 #12

"AI relies on the stolen works of humans (art and writing)..." mike_c Mar 29 #86

Without planning and guardrails... Happy Hoosier Mar 29 #13

AI doesn't concern me as much... biocube Mar 29 #14

You aren't wrong ... BUT KentuckyWoman Mar 29 #17

Of course it is, Disaffected Mar 29 #19

If you mean generative AI, the kind most hyped now, it's badly flawed tech based on stolen intellectual property, highplainsdem Mar 29 #20

Very true statement mgardener Mar 29 #21

Absolutely. It's a key tool of production. David__77 Mar 29 #22

It works - to the extent it works when it's mindless and will always hallucinate - only because of IP theft. highplainsdem Mar 29 #29

I guess that depends on one's view of "intellectual property". David__77 Mar 29 #32

The AI companies who felt they had a right to take everyone else's IP have been quick to scream if highplainsdem Mar 29 #40

That's absolutely true and on a certain level funny to see. David__77 Mar 29 #82

I'm in favor of creatives owning their intellectual property, and that right being protected. It's as highplainsdem Mar 29 #84

That can certainly be adjudicated as with any other property issue. David__77 Mar 29 #85

Legal judgments aren't always ethical, as everyone here is aware. Creatives and those who support highplainsdem Mar 29 #87

A.I. got us Donald Trump in 2024. Nuff said. Botany Mar 29 #24

Wish AI meant actual (human) intelligence. BattleRow Mar 29 #49

AI is the devil. We think we can control it, but we can't. Scrivener7 Mar 29 #25

Devil with the Blue Dress? She's the Devil in disguise? thought crime Mar 29 #31

The problem is not a fork or a knife, the problem is who has it in their hand...An assassin with a knife is very Escurumbele Mar 29 #27

"Guns aren't the problem..." ? thought crime Mar 29 #33

An accurate analogy, however dlk Mar 29 #30

I agree. I've been saying this about computers for decades. However, I think most of us agree that IA should be Martin68 Mar 29 #34

I think it sound like a scream.AAAAA.IIIIII... MiHale Mar 29 #36

The problem is not how we use it, Mblaze Mar 29 #38

The most critical word is "you" -- meaning WHO? Martin Eden Mar 29 #39

If it were only looked as a fork Javaman Mar 29 #43

We are about to FAFO on AI. LudwigPastorius Mar 29 #44

True, AI by itself is benign. The companies controlling it, however, are not. tinrobot Mar 29 #45

hmmm...almost 50 replies and no interaction... ret5hd Mar 29 #48

I sometimes stir a pot in the kitchen and then walk away until dinner is served Soul_of_Wit Mar 29 #60

Don't see how that's "stirring the pot" ABC123Easy Mar 29 #50

I do agree with you there. One of my smartest friends, a tech professional, thinks like Joinformill. Scrivener7 Mar 29 #55

It's a tool for the billionaire overlords, not for us FakeNoose Mar 29 #51

Where was our blue ribbon commission prior to its release. Prairie_Seagull Mar 29 #52

AI can be rejected - and should be, by ethical, smart people who have any choice in the matter. highplainsdem Mar 29 #59

Granted that using genAI is optional and can be rejected..... anciano Mar 29 #62

It's genAI being hyped and used most widely. Which is why people need to know about how harmful highplainsdem Mar 29 #63

The sole cat I ever had agreed with you. Prairie_Seagull Mar 29 #83

Not like a fork: like a cruise missle with a spork instead of a warhead. JustABozoOnThisBus Mar 29 #54

Two huge negatives, both related to human nature Soul_of_Wit Mar 29 #58

In addition, we need... cornball 24 Mar 29 #61

And using AI harms human intelligence. See this thread on yet another article about that: highplainsdem Mar 29 #67

That's very simple Renew Deal Mar 29 #68

Sadly, few people are fully able to tell when AI provides facts or fallacies. MineralMan Mar 29 #69

This is absolutely true! Oneironaut Mar 29 #71

AI differs from a fork in that a fork does not PufPuf23 Mar 29 #72

americans can't be trusted with sharp objects bigtree Mar 29 #74

AI cannot replace humans Progressive dog Mar 29 #80