- cross-posted to:
- techtakes
- cross-posted to:
- techtakes
cross-posted from: https://awful.systems/post/5962853
science shows as true what you thought was only 99% true
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVf7VUX_iUk&list=UU9rJrMVgcXTfa8xuMnbhAEA - video
https://pivottoai.libsyn.com/20251015-ai-is-not-popular-and-ai-users-are-unpleasant-asshats - podcasttime: 5 min 57 sec
You must log in or # to comment.
I’m being required to use AI at work, and the first thing that jumped out at me was how often it says, “You’re right!” That is like a drug for a narcissist.
Cockatiel looking into a mirror.
Fire your boss who made AI a requirement.
The only use for AI is generation of trash. What’s your job?
Software developer. A bunch of software companies (maybe most of them now?) are insisting that programmers start using AI.
It’s so clearly not a finished or functioning product. In terms of art, I tried to use it as a tool, and it’s useless. You can’t make AI assisted videos or art, because it can’t produce duplicates of anything. It can’t stay on model, it can’t use a set design to make anything. You can’t plug in frames and ask for inbetweens, you can’t give it a script and get comic panels, none of that works. You get random sloppy bullshit.
When the goal is getting people to use it to jack up company investments then getting people to use it, even if forced, does mean it is finished and functioning in the context of the goals.
It certainly isn’t functional for what it is advertised as though, as you pointed out.
I use a local deepseek-r1 instance for simple code refactorings and boilerplate (e.g. to generate obvious tests). Am I an asshat now?
That depends… do you say obnoxious stuff like “AI let me 10x my productivity” or “You just need to right prompt, bro” or “AI will be good as soon as we build another trillion dollars in data centers”?
Nah, actually I kind of hate most genAI because it’s mostly a copypaste machine that steals other peoples code and art and stuff. But I do use it still because it speeds up menial tasks a lot and I don’t feel like I’m stealing shit from others that way.
i think it would do all of us a service to separate between generative AI and LLM assisted prompting.
Keep the human element. I’ve seen some use cases where AI can help solve a human problem with a human need. I usually see slop intended to boost other numbers, like social media engagement stats and SEO (need 3 pages of content for your spaghetti recipe? Good news! AI can help, and it can make the recipe too. Now one robot pleases another and the human need is an afterthought)
According to this sub? Yup, most definitely! According to my own opinion? As long as you use it responsibly and limited to the scope of LLM (scope, as in: whatever one would usually use a Random Text Generator for, aka. inspiration, non-critical parsing, and mass spam attacks), then go ahead.
This sub appears to be barking up the wrong tree most of the time anyway (just look at the name), so I wouldn’t value anything that is posted here too high, ironically.
I use chat5-reasoning in cursor for code generation. I am also an asshat. But it’s not because I use ai.
That’s the point the article made.
The most consistent predictors of AI use across studies were aversive personality traits (e.g., Machiavellianism, narcissism, psychopathy).
That cyborg vs synthetic battle was decent but I had my hopes higher after the build up
I’m so pissed that they had every plot line ready to wrap up but then just fucking didn’t.
It’s so frustrating because any device to keep these plots going is just contrivance.
I’m so incredibly disappointed that they decided against an anthology and are continuing the Marcy plot.
If there’s a season 2 I doubt it’ll be good, I’m super disappointed.
That’s a gross over generalization but yes.
I mean, I agree, but the anti-AI guys are also asshats.
