Generative artificial intelligence is simply a waste of our time and money

What benefits have we gained from generative AI (really ML) that currently outweigh the cost of researching developing, and running them? Or do we stick with an expected value based on what generative AI may be able to do and the next step technologies that come after it?

The article is making pretty clear arguments for costs of generative AI, and raising the author's opinion that it isn't worth it. Just claiming it is in fact worth it without anything to support that isn't super helpful.

Re: Generative artificial intelligence is simply a waste of our time and money

#9

Post by nulld3v » Sun, Apr 07, 2024, 8:46 PM UTC

Basically the same talking points that have been repeated to ad-infinitum, quotes from article below:

- "generative AI is a mimic of human action, parroting back our words and images"

- "[AI] take[s] computing capacity away from other, potentially more useful activities"

- "[AI] requires an enormous amount of energy", "environmental costs are well-known"

- "AI is underpinned by significant capital investment in computing infrastructure" "This investment could go somewhere else, more useful"

- "AI is also sucking up innovation funding, especially venture capital."

- "it is threatening to overwhelm us with AI spam"

- "AI will necessarily lead to significant social change and associated costs"

TLDR: AI is a stochastic parrot, is not environmentally friendly, is expensive and generates spam

Re: Generative artificial intelligence is simply a waste of our time and money

#10

Post by jeffreygoesto » Sun, Apr 07, 2024, 8:47 PM UTC

CuriouslyC wrote: post #6

So many strawmen.

Like for example?