this post was submitted on 16 Aug 2025
500 points (93.7% liked)

Technology

74180 readers
3776 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Not the same. The underlying tech of llm's has mqssively diminishing returns. You can akready see it, could see it a year ago if you looked. Both in computibg power and required data, and we do jot have enough data, literally have nit created in all of history.

This is not "ai", it's a profoubsly wasteful capitalist party trick.

Please get off the slop and re-build your brain.

[–] iopq@lemmy.world 2 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

That's the argument Paul Krugman used to justify his opinion that the internet peaked in 1998.

You still need to wait for AI to crash and a bunch of research to happen and for the next wave to come. You can't judge the internet by the dot com crash, it became much more impactful later on

[–] outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

No. No i don't. I trust alan Turing.

[–] iopq@lemmy.world 2 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

NB: Alan Turing famously invented ChatGPT

[–] outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

One of the major contributors to early versions. Then they did the math and figured out it was a dead end. Yes.

Also one of the other contributors (weizenbaum i think?) pointed out that not only was it stupid, it was dabgeroys and made people deranged fanatical devotees impervious to reason, who would discard their entire intellect and education to cult about this shit, in a madness no logic could breach. And that's just from eliza.

[–] iopq@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (1 children)

We're talking about 80 years ago

[–] outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

~1948-52, yeah

Edit: The underlying math and method. Not alone, of course. The main difference between then and now is the data set and some tuning, not a fundamentally new metjod or kibd of thing.