No. I blame the users for creating a market by using it. If no one was interested in that bullshit, then that industry would have collapsed 2-3 years ago.
There will always be psychopaths with “business ideas” that do fuck all for this planet or the living beings roaming on it. Can’t prevent that. But the general masses enabling them? That’s definitely on every single one of them.
The market isn’t growing due to demand, though. AI is being pushed by businesses and investors hoping that demand will appear in the future. They’re burning through tons of cash, not growing naturally due to user interest.
If everyone was completely boycotting this machine learning bullshit, they wouldn’t stand a chance pushing it.
Apps “offering” LLM bullshit? Use other software.
Support chat forces chatbot on you? Call them by the number on the imprint. And if that doesn’t work - send them a letter with a notice period to respond.
“Vibe coders” submitting pull requests? Tell them to shove their plagiarism where the sun don’t shine.
I have not had to use LLM snake oil even once to date, and I don’t plan on accepting it anywhere. Ig everyone did that, the “technology” would have been dead on arrival.
While it’s true that some demand is related, the vast vast majority of the spend is speculative on what AI might be and assuming that if it manages to be the thing of their dreams, it will demand exponentially more resources than the current LLM slop.
They are spending this money without clear indication that the demand they want is there. For example, OpenAI at one point claimed that, by now, businesses would be paying them $50k/year for a single ‘instance’ of LLM, good for equivalent to one human headcount.
They are currently betting that at some point, they’ll effectively fix the lack of actual reasoning (a number of AI enthusiasts will claim that AI can have an entirely distinct thing from any reasoning we have ever known but still call it reasoning, which is a pretty stupid cop out). And/or they’ll translate this reliably to robotics (so far this has ended up being pretty elusive, investors assumed the same fake language that passes for executive-speak means it could apply to menial manual labor, but it hasn’t worked yet).
But yeah, refraining from using these services would deflate the expectations more quickly, enough people toying around with it sparks the imagination of what the execs think they can get for it…
I understand your reasoning, but I disagree - I am sure that if 90% of people to whom “AI” was marketed would react with a “fuck off with that bullshit”, they wouldn’t ever have gotten the funding they have to begin with.
No. I blame the users for creating a market by using it. If no one was interested in that bullshit, then that industry would have collapsed 2-3 years ago. There will always be psychopaths with “business ideas” that do fuck all for this planet or the living beings roaming on it. Can’t prevent that. But the general masses enabling them? That’s definitely on every single one of them.
The market isn’t growing due to demand, though. AI is being pushed by businesses and investors hoping that demand will appear in the future. They’re burning through tons of cash, not growing naturally due to user interest.
If everyone was completely boycotting this machine learning bullshit, they wouldn’t stand a chance pushing it. Apps “offering” LLM bullshit? Use other software.
Support chat forces chatbot on you? Call them by the number on the imprint. And if that doesn’t work - send them a letter with a notice period to respond.
“Vibe coders” submitting pull requests? Tell them to shove their plagiarism where the sun don’t shine.
I have not had to use LLM snake oil even once to date, and I don’t plan on accepting it anywhere. Ig everyone did that, the “technology” would have been dead on arrival.
While it’s true that some demand is related, the vast vast majority of the spend is speculative on what AI might be and assuming that if it manages to be the thing of their dreams, it will demand exponentially more resources than the current LLM slop.
They are spending this money without clear indication that the demand they want is there. For example, OpenAI at one point claimed that, by now, businesses would be paying them $50k/year for a single ‘instance’ of LLM, good for equivalent to one human headcount.
They are currently betting that at some point, they’ll effectively fix the lack of actual reasoning (a number of AI enthusiasts will claim that AI can have an entirely distinct thing from any reasoning we have ever known but still call it reasoning, which is a pretty stupid cop out). And/or they’ll translate this reliably to robotics (so far this has ended up being pretty elusive, investors assumed the same fake language that passes for executive-speak means it could apply to menial manual labor, but it hasn’t worked yet).
But yeah, refraining from using these services would deflate the expectations more quickly, enough people toying around with it sparks the imagination of what the execs think they can get for it…
I understand your reasoning, but I disagree - I am sure that if 90% of people to whom “AI” was marketed would react with a “fuck off with that bullshit”, they wouldn’t ever have gotten the funding they have to begin with.
Oh, that’s why you’re blaming me. You think the free market is real, like as in something that exists in real life.