All their responses are generated, no conscience there, just AI. “Another brick in the wall” hits stronger than ever now.
People who use the internet are actual NPCs. I’m the only main character here.
I agree.
I prefer “meat proxy”.
Unless you’re saying that people using ai is causing you to isolate yourself and bottle up your own feelings that’s not the correct song to use.
I don’t know what an NPC is but I like using AI because it’s a cheap form of therapy. Even though they’re keeping notes without HIPAA laws in place I figure I don’t matter enough to get put on some sort of government blah blah blah. I’m just another fucked up individual. One of billions I’d imagine.
Please don’t use LLMs for therapy. I know it feels like it’s helping, but LLMs are specifically designed to tell you what you want to hear. People have been convinced to do some very terrible things because the LLMs keep reinforcing beliefs instead of challenging them or pushing back.
I know everything kind of sucks right now, but don’t make it worse by letting the LLM/AI economy start messing with your actual brain.
Terrible advice. LLM chatbots have very positive results for therapy and while it doesn’t replace a human contact it is far, far better than nothing.
Actually crazy to get upvoted for saying to people in need they should just suck it up.
“Terrible Advice”, and “Imagined a response and railed against it” in one comment. Efficient work, for sure.
They were upvoted for being, on the whole, correct.
Their comment is still there, you can read it… ? Their comment is not only wrong, it is dangerous.
It is correct at every word.
The dangerous ideas here are the ones you’re pushing. Word regurgitating machines are not therapists, they have no understanding of what’s being said, just that the typical response to a set of words is this other set of words. That’s all they do, and they fuck even that up with high frequency.
Please read about this subject and stop spreading misinformation.
Non-player character, a bot.
Like you are a robot, letting a statistical output dictate your stuff.
Non-player character. Normally a completely reasonable term from video games where, depending on the game, most characters you encounter might not be players.
Then it started being used by the alt-right to refer to people who disagree with them and therefore aren’t people who actually think for themselves but rather following a script, so using it to describe real people is kinda gross. The reasoning being “they believe what everyone else does so they’re sheeple/NPCs”. Because only controversial beliefs are an indication of being capable of thought.
This is exactly the kind of black and white reasoning that annoys me about online discourse. The camps of “neverslop” and “techbro shill” are extremely vocal, and squeeze out anyone in between with a nuanced opinion (like myself). And I know I’m not the only one because I get upvotes!
Fuck, Linus Torvalds uses ai. Is he an unthinking npc now? If anyone might be an authority on the ethical use of ai, it would be him.
“But Glitch, that’s an appeal to authority fallacy!”
Okay, hypothetical strawman, you have a point.
Sure, there’s people who exist who operate like how op describes. I’m not disputing that. But saying everyone who uses ai at all is braindead is both incorrect and insulting. I use ai for some shit, it’s genuinely a somewhat useful tool and middling quality entertainment. But did ai write this comment? No, it did not, nor has ai told me what my opinions should be. So, proposal disproved by counterexample.
Someone is going to tell me I’m taking this too seriously, i can feel it.
somewhat useful tool and middling quality entertainment.
is that worth all the damage it’s causing? for a bit of middling entertainment?
think about the company you keep bro. altman? musk? amodei? trump?
is that worth all the damage it’s causing? for a bit of middling entertainment?
No, it’s not. But the damage is already done, and will be done regardless of anything I do. For the sake of argument, let’s say I do stop using ai altogether. There will always be something that I’m not doing good enough to some people, one of my favorite examples is eating meat. It’s delicious, and the vegans can kiss my ass. I still shop from amazon, other options are not practical. I work for a company that supports republican politicians, I have to pay rent somehow. I could continue.
think about the company you keep bro. altman? musk? amodei? trump?
I’m not keeping that kind of company. I have repeatedly and loudly insisted that those people deserve prison at best. The ai platform I currently use is not associated with any of the big ai companies, and I intend to switch to self hosting in the near future.
Something you should understand is that shit sucks. And sometimes, you can benefit from shit sucking. Taking advantage of shit sucking does not invalidate demands to make it not suck. I haven’t said much about my disdain for the environmental impacts because on the subject of the environmental impact I agree with the neverslop side, but at the same time what the fuck am I supposed to do about it?
Here’s an example for you. Recently, a friend of mine was involved in a car crash. Based on how the cars ended up, it looked like my friend was at fault. However, a flock camera caught the other party speeding into the intersection where the collision happened. Flock is a product of evil and needs to not exist, but between now and then we can sometimes take advantage of it.
you ride with those 4 every time you use any model that’s built on theft. justify it however you need to sleep at night.
You’re delusional. Take your kitto coupon to the funhole, they love hating ai in all its forms there. I’m not interested in a cult echochamber.
What the actual fuck is a kitto coupon?
AI is making you nuts dude.
You’re on lemmy and you seriously don’t know about funhole? you’re missing out.
https://lemmy.sdf.org/c/funhole
Anyway, kitto coupons were a viral meme over there for a while (was pretty annoying, but I get it). I wanted to provide an example in this comment, but lemmy’s search function sucks major ass (actually worse than reddit, and reddit’s search has always been shit).
Anyway, don’t blame memes being too niche for you on ai.
fuck ai, fuck them, fuck you, fuck funhole
Thanks for promoting Funhole! It’s the only official safe space for AI artists on the internet!
kitto coupon
not sure what you’re smoking there. what the fuck are you rambling about promptboy?
No, it’s not.
So you’re simply going to suck AI dick even knowing the damage it’s causing? That’s an impressive amount of ignorance you’ve crammed into that pinhead of yours.
Is he an unthinking npc now?
As the creator and leading expert on Linux, he’s ultimately responsible for the project.
The NPCs have no responsibility, they are just there.
this one time I had a huge 200 file folder full of ugly filenames i needed to be standardized to use in a script. Renaming them all manually was easily a 3 hour job at least. I described the end result name syntax i wanted and gave the full list of the current file names to an llm, and it gave me a powershell script that renamed every file for me perfectly in 2 minutes.
could i have coded that myself? sure. but then I’d be deciding between “three hours making a complicated file renaming script or 3 hours or manually renaming 200 files for 3 hours”. The llm solved my problem for me and allowed me to continue with my actual work rather than wasting time doing data entry.
is this stupid npc behavior? if it is then it sure seems like only npc idiots like saving time.
Yup, that is where I also use AI for. The boring stuff. Clicking on repeat for 3 hours and then it turns out you made a mistake and need to do it all over again. No thanks.
The creative things I do myself.
I think that’s perfectly reasonable, just review the script first for anything that might break your pc.
It sounds like, for the purposes of this post, you and many other people would not be in the “People who use AI” category:
All their responses are generated, no conscience there, just AI.
I have coworkers who are effectively meat proxies. I think the term NPC applies well to how interacting with these folks feels, since it does feel like I’m not talking to a real human, but a computer trying to appear human.
Is OPs net too wide? Probably, yeah. But the sentiment is real, the frustration is real, and contextualizing those interactions as with NPCs resonates.
Have your fun with using AI, but there’s no need to yum our yuck.
How practical :
- “everyone in this group is stupid”
- “That’s wrong”
- “no but i only mean the stupid ones”
Ah yes, the “Everyone is a true Scotsman” fallacy
Something something the fallacy fallacy
Oh I’m right there with you (and op) in your annoyance with meat proxies. I just don’t want to be lumped in with them. The amount of times I deal with someone telling me “chat gpt said I need xyz thing” and I have to explain that what they’re asking for is impractical/impossible/expensive/doesn’t exist. And then they get mad at me about it! Fuckers.
The AI discourse is rather pointless when you see how much people are willing to bend their own opinions. So that it’s always in the right, and one step further is the sloppery slope to hell
As you mentioned. Look at the Linux communities. Before Linus came out in support it was “Microslop” this “vibe coded OS” that. And now suddenly, AI is actually a good thing.
Or G*mers. On the one hand they’re complaining about AI games being sold on Steam. But on the other hand they’ll also defend Steam selling AI games. But on the other hand complain when Epic sells AI games. And then on the other hand they’ll praise AI piracy and emulators.
The AI discourse is rather pointless when you see how much people are willing to bend their own opinions. So that it’s always in the right, and one step further is the sloppery slope to hell
yup, guilty of that myself.
As you mentioned. Look at the Linux communities. Before Linus came out in support it was “Microslop” this “vibe coded OS” that. And now suddenly, AI is actually a good thing.
Both things are true. Linus has a proven track record of being good at his job and knowing what he’s talking about. Microsoft has a proven track record of producing shit, and making their products worse. Giving them ai just makes them do what they were already doing faster. Linus speaking out didn’t change my opinion on the matter, it only confirmed the current iteration of my opinions on ai that I’ve been slowly developing over the past few years.
Or G*mers. On the one hand they’re complaining about AI games being sold on Steam. But on the other hand they’ll also defend Steam selling AI games. But on the other hand complain when Epic sells AI games. And then on the other hand they’ll praise AI piracy and emulators.
Gamers as a collective are fucking morons. That aside, I don’t hold all developers to the same standard. A solo dev with no funding is not the same as a 200 man team with the backing of a multi billion dollar publisher. Holding them both to the same standards is asinine. So if the next GTA/Elder Scrolls/Call of Duty/Final Fantasy/Whatever has vibe code or slop assets, gamers are absolutely right to rake those studios over the coals. They have the money to pay for programmers and artists. There is no excuse.
On the other hand, our nameless ideal solo dev who’s struggling to so much as pay rent, fuckit go nuts. Vibe code the whole thing, slop out the assets, whatever. Just review the damn code, and curate the assets. If the project has any creative passion whatsoever, that will come through in how the slop is put together. I see using ai assets the same as using packaged assets from, say, the unity store: you didn’t make it, but what’s more important is how you use it.
And on ai piracy and emulators, I’m just tickled by the giant ai shaped middle finger pointed at nintendo and the ai companies.
Holy shit, you dropped this 👑
I love external validation!
The main downside of Ai is expectation of speed. Everyone expects things to be done very fast. You have no time to do your own research, to learn how to do it and be confident that you have done it right
Fuck, Linus Torvalds uses ai. Is he an unthinking npc now?
yep.
imho you’re not taking it seriously enough sport. if you were, you’d have stopped using AI.
Calling people NPCs because they use AI is pretty ironic. Using a tool doesn’t make someone less human, any more than using a calculator makes someone incapable of thinking. The real question is whether people are using AI to expand their thinking or outsourcing it entirely. Blindly repeating AI-generated content is one thing; using AI as a tool for creativity, learning, or productivity is another. Judge the thought, not the tool.
i am absolutely judging the tool. no matter how you use it, you’re tacitly approving of its existence. by continuing to use chatgpt and claude, you’re essentially saying “all the stealing you did, all the power you use, all the underhanded business tactics keeping you afloat, i’m okay with that.”
Don’t want to wake you, but this is happening with the majority of products in imperialism. The AI it’s just a bigger more concentrated tool of theft.
If you are ok with the stealing of lives (kids/adults) in Africa, Asia or wherever, it’s a little ironic to have a problem with the AI stealing all the continents.
“and yet you participate in society”
Yes, but I don’t go blindfolded and I don’t have double standards. AI is the pinnacle of the system not a problem (get as much as you can from others without give something).
since when is “i will not contribute to worsening the system i am forced to be a part of” a double standard? people need to eat. they do not need chatbots.
They don’t need a lot. They don’t need 3000cc cars, 2 closet of unused clothes, new iphone/android every year, etc etc. But guess what.
what?
You both have a point, but I’ve seen people make excuses such as the fact that ethically produced chocolate isn’t as cheap as non-ethically produced chocolate, which could be bought everyday. But why buy and eat chocolate everyday?
It is the same thing with factory farming; people now expect to eat more meat than people had, and advertising says to men that you’re as masculine as the amount of meat you eat.
The influence of hyperconsumerism is horrible, it justifies luxury at the expense of ethics as a necessity.
The ones at the top have the worst case of luxury addiction.
what is with the high school level takes today? the system is bad, people exist in the system, people need to remain sane, people can indulge in a bit of badness sometimes in order to remain sane without being labeled as bad. that’s the baseline. that’s where the discussion should start. the response to “there is no ethical consumption under capitalism” should not be to just consume everything.
i have cheap clothes that are likely cheap because of unethical practices. same with my phone, same with my food. the difference between all those and an llm is that i need all of those things to exist in polite society. i do not need an llm.
some people’s situation is such that they need a car. that’s fine. they do not need an llm. some people have businesses that can only reach enough customers through social media. that’s fine. they do not need an llm.
llms are the civet coffee of the digital world. expensive, bad for the environment in more ways than you think, highly unethical, nothing special, and completely unnecessary. nobody needs coffee, but some people “need” coffee. but nobody needs civet coffee. like nobody needs an llm.
the system is bad, people exist in the system, people need to remain sane, people can indulge in a bit of badness sometimes in order to remain sane without being labeled as bad
What do you mean? What I’m getting is that people must do bad things to remain sane in a bad system but they have to do it in small doses so they don’t be labeled as a bad person? Sorry, this part is just unclear to me.
I guess what I can get from that, is that some people think huge doses of it are normalised, it’s what they’re used to. In a bad society, unethically produced chocolate is cheap, advertising says—and omitting the fact it is unethically produced—it will make you feel good, from childhood to adulthood.
And since people dislike change, being confronted with the fact that something that feels good is actually bad results in cognitive dissonance. Eating chocolate daily something they’re used to, and even if an ethical option exists, if they can only afford it once in every 3 days, they are unwilling to change even if they must support slavery.
When people do boycotts what tends to happen is that they find out that they don’t in fact, need something that is basically a luxury to that degree. It was just something they are used to.
People can dislike boomers and privileged people for the same thing. I mean, if you think you are allowed to criticise them, don’t you think the ones below you also have the right to criticise you? Because unfortunately, I am one of the people whose suffering westerners find acceptable as long as it brings them convenience. Like CEOs with their employees, now that I think of it.
Same thing with clothes, phones and cars. There are people who make fun of others for being diligent with the 20-80 rule because apparently normal people should replace phones every 2 years. Seeing comments like that really shocked me because I am not used to seeing such an attitude of luxury. Since I don’t edit videos or play demanding games, when my battery fails me every 3 years I would replace my battery. Hearing people buy clothes every month for a total of 12 per year also somewhat shocked me, because in 5 years that’s already 60 pieces of clothing. And it is shocking to see American traffic because their cars are big AF.
not must. i mean that we should not judge people for acting how the system wants them to. being a conscious consumer is good, but you’re not automatically a bad person if you splurge occasionally.
what i take issue with is the “double standards” comment, which essentially says “if you don’t use llms but you own a phone/commute by car/eat meat/whatever, you’re a hypocrite”. it ignores the context in which people exist.
i will absolutely call people out for replacing their phone every two years or shopping on shein, but i will not judge them for simply owning a car. some places have shitty infrastructure.
likewise, i will not judge someone who just wants a taste of luxury now and then, like taking a fancy vacation once in a while. but i will judge the hell out of them if the destination is dubai.
point being, people need to be able to treat themselves occasionally without being shamed. shame is reserved for those who do it all the time, especially when knowing the cost.
llms are a new luxury. i will not judge people for trying them out. i will, however, explain the real cost. if they persist after that, they will be shamed.
If you are ok with the stealing of lives (kids/adults) in Africa, Asia or wherever, it’s a little ironic
What makes you think that anyone on this site is ok with that?
Do you know where you are right now?
It was an answer to a comment not a post.
What makes you think that anyone on this site is ok with that?
You should change the anyone to everyone, because the majority does it, either without knowing or knowing and has no alternative. Its called modern society.
What if one doesn’t use commercial LLMs, and use open-source local LLM instead?
the ones that are actually open, as in publishing not only weights but training data and code, are startlingly few.
What about using the output of the tool?
Like, if I take one of those life-saving drugs discovered by AI… What’s your take?
Or if I look at the hurricane path prediction maps.
Or if the fusion reactor designs created with AI work out.
none of those are llm-based systems. as for llm-created things, i will avoid them like the plague because normalising them is giving even more power to the owners.
It’s quite refreshing to find sometimes people thinking the same things I do about the current state of the world, it seems the vocal majority is on the AI hype train. Maybe I am naive but I hope there are many people “like us” that simply keep their opinions less public, just because they are not so hyped and following the trend
most people i know in computer-related professions have negative opinions on llms. they range from unimpressed to 100% opposed. people who are neutral to positive are usually not aware of any background.
The OP didn’t specify. The post is just about “AI”.
Also, the pharmaceutical AI is the same AI as LLMs. It’s just trained differently.
lol
using AI to expand their thinking
An oxymoron.
Thought-terminating cliché
Thought-terminating cliché
That’s actually a pretty great description of LLMs.
Where did you hear this term 😁😁, you heard the adults talking and thought you understood. So precious
Lemmy users would’ve hated when the calculator was invented.
Comparing LLMs to calculators is so goddamn disingenuous.
I used to be able to do long division in my head. Square roots. That kind of thing.
Then they allowed us to use calculators in class, and I was too young to realise the danger. Now that part of my brain is gone. Dead. I can’t do those calculations without using the machine as a crutch. It mutilated me, maimed me, killed a part of me, and made me dependent on it.
I won’t let LLMs do the same to the rest of my brain, and will treat anyone who does with the pity, disgust, and existential nausea and horror they deserve.
This is the correct take. You’re 100% correct, all of us who used to “think” (how archaic! The TV screen tells us what to think) feel this way.
If people equated calculators to have achieved the ability to solve all the problems of mathematics or replace mathematicians, people would be pissed off.
Fuck you, with a rake, sideways. You’re either the most disingenuous person who ever lived (unlikely, stiff competition, you’re not smart enough), or the dumbest person who ever lived (obviously true lmao, we can all tell)
Ok, when?
Comparing LLMs to simple tools is a bullshit argument. Calculators are deterministic and they don’t confidently give incorrect answers, for one.
The hammer doesn’t hit the nail 100% of the time. Sometimes it hits your thumb and it hurts a lot.
A professional will be able to handle a hammer a lot better than an amateur.
The IPO bots are out to pump the numbers. This is an established routine lol. The idiots eat it up
Calling people NPCs because they delegate their thinking to a machine.
Unused, the brain atrophies. The human dies.
There’s still a living body, most of the time, but it’s merely the slop machine’s peripheral.
A husk, a mockery of humanity, a corporation’s wet dream, still given the same rights and respect as a real living human being, despite being merely a tool to carry on the corporation’s whims.
NPCs is appropriate. Clearer than reverse centaurs.
A meat proxy.
A question for them: Why live anymore?
Okay, a bit more friendly version: where did you gave up living your own life?Using AI is not “giving up living one’s own life”…
Yeah that comment seems to indicate using an AI summary and some kind of quick response to emails so they can get back to their kids/family as reason they shouldn’t live. There are problems with using llms for shit, but blanket statements about them make people seem foolish.
What about opensource self hosted AI?
There are still major ethical issues with how they get training data, but the problem with hijacking the economy and society seems resolved. I feel like I can more easily forgive the copyright theft for someone just fucking around in their homelab, replacing Google assistant.
Maybe I’m just bean-souping.
don’t forget that frequent LLM use erodes patience and skills. even with the training ethics and environmental ethics set aside, they make you measurably dumber.
LLM users consistently underperform at neural, linguistic, and behavioral levels
This kinda gets philosophy-of-cognative-science-ey, but it kinda smells like “measuring a fish by its tree climbing ability”. Or maybe like goodharts law.
There are many different kinds of smart, is the kind of smart they’re measuring the one that will be relevant?
Again, I don’t want to carry too much water for AI, but I also don’t want to propagate arguments that also apply to other tools I like. Consider: externalizing memory. Without the tool you used to capture that memory, you’re completely unable to function. Dependency on it reduces your ability to remember things yourself. By many measures, it makes your dumber and less productive. But I wouldn’t personally consider taking notes to be detrimental.
So I want to be very careful when we make claims that externalizing some aspect of our cognition makes us worse somehow.Books and calculators externalise skills that we see as tedious, like memorisation and calculation. LLMs externalise skills that we value in and of themselves, like decision making, art, and socialisation.
Would you rather live with people who can’t memorise dates and perform arithmetic? Or people who can’t make a decision or write a beautiful story?
These other things were also once valued.
Do you want to create a society where storytelling isn’t valued?
I am pretty sure if you asked people with knowledge if they want a society where accumulating knowledge is no longer an exceptional trait, they would have also said “no”. When I was a kid we were still told using calculators is bad; yet having calculators everywhere meant we could suddenly solve bigger issues at a larger scale.
Lots of technological progress has brought significant change. And no doubt all of them also brought big issues with them. But ultimately all of them helped us advance further.
I also don’t like that my (work) life changes considerably due to LLMs. But that cat is out of the bag. Now I can only try to adjust accordingly or I will simply be left behind.
Everyone I know who uses LLMs is becoming a more boring person. I don’t use LLMs because I don’t want to turn out like them.
Because you seem to be giving measured responses, even though I and other vehemently disagree with you, here’s where I think you’re missing things:
computers, the internet, and calculators make many tasks significantly easier. That’s the point of technology. However, if you don’t understand the how and why of math, you’ll have no idea how to use a calculator. If you just take whatever the first result of an internet search tells you at face value, you’re demonstrating a complete lack of critical thought. You have to be able to analyse sources, or you’ll just be mired in mis- and disinformation. If the only thing you know how to do on a smartphone is search the internet or download and use an app, then not only are you inefficiently using the technology, but you are also making yourself incredibly vulnerable to security and privacy threats.
The same is true for LLMs, but doubly so, because everything they output is in natural language (or code output, in the case of coding). If you are an expert coder, then it is possible to use LLMs to significantly increase your efficiency. If not, though, you completely offload the entire problem to the LLM, and can’t even check if the solution is valid because, like the internet, you have to have the knowledge necessary to question the source. If you make the assumption that it’s responding to you as a person would, then you’re screwed, because you’re incorrectly ascribing knowledge to a stochastic parrot. LLMs have all the worst cognitive pitfalls of the smartphone, the calculator, and the internet, but only actually have the strengths of the internet, because they’re only as good as the training data. Every single thing an LLM outputs must be treated with scepticism because the issues aren’t in every output, but could be in any output.
In a world filled with LLMs being used as expert systems, the low-skill users will, inevitably, fail to actually gain skill from using the tool, because the flaw in the tool is inherent (it isn’t actually an expert), and you require preexisting knowledge to be able to check its output. In exactly the same way that an LLM cannot reliably check its own output for errors, low-skill users are similarly unable to do so, and will simply offload their own cognition. This leads to a decreasing number of experts who are actually able to use the system efficiently, and an ever-growing layer of untermenschen who must simply trust the mechanical parrot like some oracle, with about the same level of accuracy as your average cold-reading psychic.
This is not an issue of those with knowledge trying to privilege their own skills. It is that experts are warning that this abomination, which the public wants to use like an expert system, is not and can never be an “expert”. Non-experts simply think it’s entrenched power trying to protect itself, but it’s not. The data agrees with my points above. I can show you several particularly damning studies which demonstrate my point.
the cats out of the bag… for now. i wonder if it will remain financially feasible
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cm9qzdqpxy48o
https://www.nbcnews.com/business/markets/tech-stocks-nasdaq-ai-boom-fears-deepen-rcna606512
I think it’s also worth pointing out that we’re all working with the limited currencies of time and our own processing bandwidth and that tradeoffs that shift those resources to activities we value more can still be net positives even if a widely valued skill is taking a loss.
Is using GPS making me worse at on-the-fly navigation? Yes. Am I willing to make that tradeoff to free up that brain power for better experiencing my surroundings, listening to an audiobook, etc. while also getting basically a sixth sense of awareness about traffic, obstructions, etc.? Also, absolutely yes. (I do try to temper the loss in several ways though.)
I use (local) LLMs semi-frequently, and I think “net positive” usage of them is definitely possible, but it requires a few things: 1) Be self-aware enough to recognize the tradeoffs you’re making. 2) Be tech and math literate enough to at least have a surface level understanding of how they work, so your tradeoffs are informed. (And yes, I’m aware the vast majority of LLM users do not adhere to either.)
Who here knows how to hunt? Any caveman would call us stupid.
People using this study to spread misinformation is what erodes my patience.
care to expand on that stance, maybe cite some counter references? or at least explain why you feel it’s misinformation?
You can read the paper and see for yourself : putting aside the usual weaknesses of such study (low number of participants, very specific situation, etc.), its goal is to see whether AI can replace training in the process of learning a skill. They are comparing students who trained and students who didn’t train a specific skill, it has absolutely nothing to do with the daily use of AI chatbots.
I think it means people who use AI to talk to people.
Citing “Another Brick In The Wall” is suspiciously generic and uncreative.
Are you offended?
And not even relevant to OPs metaphor
ever spoken to a person that heavily uses llms, thier response is to use CHATGPT every single time.
I have a coworker who I used to bounce ideas off of all the time. Even just “hey am I over engineering this?”, which was great. I don’t have that anymore because the response is always “chat says …”. If I wanted to ask an llm why wouldn’t I just do it myself?
Maybe it’s not about whether they are or are not NPCs, but the time they spend being as one. I also think spending time scrolling, having all your content delivered to you via an algorithm, also is kind of like spending time being an NPC.
And driving in traffic is usually time spent being an NPC
Using AI is way more pro-active than all those examples.
The irony is that calling people “NPCs” for using AI is itself a pretty scripted take. AI can generate text, but people still choose what to ask, what to accept, and what to do with it. “Another Brick in the Wall” was about resisting systems that flatten individuality—not about treating everyone who uses a new tool as mindless.
- Perplexity AI.
Oh interesting, I wonder if they’re adding more model instructions or other tweaks to counteract how much of the contemporary internet finds anything to do with the big LLM providers distasteful.
Perhaps? I don’t know honestly, just wanted to mess around. Put it into the AI, got a response and commented it here and then… I moved on, lol.
The entire discussion about using AI or not using it, lets me cold. Even if I wanted to stay away from it, work pretty much forces me to use it, so eh lol.
I’m sorry to hear that, that seems to be the way of tech when lead by MBAs. I don’t need to for my work, but I do have to use Teams so I’m not sure which one of us has it worse.
Removed by mod
I don’t code, don’t care about coding myself. I’m in the financial sector. Anyway, since you are disrespectful, rude and most of all you are a stranger, so bye! Blocked my love.
Removed by mod
Fuck you, and fuck the horse you rode in on, and fuck you personally. Idiot
Now dumb it down a bit so it’s more believable as a real internet comment
It’s kind of funny that people call others “NPCs” for using AI, because that sounds pretty robotic in itself. Just because someone uses AI doesn’t mean they can’t think for themselves. People still decide what to ask, what to believe, and what to do with the answers. And honestly, “Another Brick in the Wall” was about people losing their individuality, not about attacking everyone who uses a new tool.
- ChatGPT
My favorite is calling them meat proxies.
Assisted AI is fine, but putting it in the drivers seat and abandoning critical thinking skills is pretty concerning, yet sadly not surprising with the masses
I have heard lots of stupid things, and this is in the top ten indeed.
The first stupiditt is that people who use AI,.don’t use it all the time. So no not all their respondes are generated.
The second stupidity is that using AI means they use it to generate responses. Maybe they only use it to gather information or automate work tasks.
And the third stupidity is that using AI means you don’t also use your brain, thus “no conscience”.
Applying the same logic, people who read books are NPCs too because all their responses are generated, no conscience there, just sentences taken from books.
/s just in case (referring to books)
Tell me you’ve never read a book without telling me. When you read books your brain starts to produce images, scenes and new thought processes depending on what you read. That is not how I would describe copy-pasting AI output
As much as it pains me to carry water for AI, do you think that people are replacing things they liked to do with AI?
Like… They were reading for pleasure, and then they had the AI read it for them instead?
That they were talking to their friends they enjoy speaking with, and then they had the AI talk to their friends instead?Or are you saying that what you describe is the experience that you get from reading technical manuals for your work? For reading warning labels? From talking with coworkers you dislike?
If you use AI instead of reading warning labels, please get the fuck out of whatever job you’re doing. You’ll save countless lives, first of all your own.
If that’s what you thought that I said, then you have no right to judge people on their lack of intelligence or literacy.
Yes, that’s what I thought you said, because that’s what you said. If you’ve somehow said something opposite from what you meant, that’s on you.
And show me where I said people were using AI to read it.
Because I was describing the class of reading material which is dry and unimaginative, to contrast your description of what reading does to peoples minds.
I was describing two classes of data: the kind that fit what your describe, and therefore people don’t actually use AI on it, and dry technical data that doesn’t grant the benefits you describe. I did not say if people use AI on the technical material, only that they don’t use it with the enjoyable material.
So no, I didn’t say that, and if you read it as carefully a you seem to expect everyone else but you too, then you’d have just shut up instead of doubling down embarrassingly.
You’ve put it in the same list of things people dislike, along with talking to coworkers they don’t like. Right after making a point of people using AI for things they don’t like to do. Maybe you should ask the AI that generates your comments to try better.
Ah, yeah, if we’re playing the game of nitpick: show me where I claimed people were using AI to read warning labels? My first response to you started with “if”. At no point did I assert that as a fact or even assumption. But since you took it so personally, I might have hit too close to home?
You’re acting in bad faith by intentionally misunderstanding them and making it personal.
You’re acting in bad faith by intentionally misunderstanding me. But I guess that’s to be expected from an AI bro.
Nobody copy and paste the ai output like op wrote, just to interact with people.
And nobody read ai output for enjoyment either.
Yes the book analogy was wrong, but the point I was making is that OP post is just stupid on so many levels.
I might day that even AI would have done a better job at writing that post…
