• Churbleyimyam@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    4 months ago

    I think AI has mostly been about luring investors into pumping up share prices rather than offering something of genuine value to consumers.

    Some people are gonna lose a lot of other people’s money over it.

    • SLVRDRGN@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      I tried to find the advert but I see this on YouTube a lot - an Adobe AI ad which depicts, without shame, AI writing out a newsletter/promo for a business owner’s new product (cookies or ice cream or something), showing the owner putting no effort into their personal product and a customer happily consuming because they were attracted by the thoughtless promo.

      How are producers/consumers okay with everything being so mediocre??

      • MajorHavoc@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        29 days ago

        How are producers/consumers okay with everything being so mediocre??

        “You’re always trying to make everything just a little bit worse so that you can feel good about having a lot more of it. I love it. It’s so human!” - The Good Place

    • Riskable@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      My doorbell camera manufacturer now advertises their products as using, “Local AI” meaning, they’re not relying on a cloud service to look at your video in order to detect humans/faces/etc. Honestly, it seems like a good (marketing) move.

    • SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Yes, I’m getting some serious dot-com bubble vibes from the whole AI thing. But the dot-com boom produced Amazon, and every company is basically going all-in in the hope they are the new Amazon while in the end most will end up like pets.com but it’s a risk they’re willing to take.

      • slaacaa@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        “You might lose all your money, but that is a risk I’m willing to take”

        • visionairy AI techbro talking to investors
        • SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          Investors pump money in a bunch of companies so the chances of at least one of them making it big and paying them back for all the failed investments is almost guaranteed. That’s what taking risks is all about.

          • verity_kindle@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            Sure, but it SEEMS, that some investors are relying on buzzword and hype, without research and ignoring the fundamentals of investing, i.e. besides the ever evolving claims of the CEO, is the company well managed? What is their cash flow and where is it going a year from now? Do the upper level managers have coke habits?

            • slaacaa@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              You’re right, but these fundamentals don’t really matter anymore, investors are buying hype and hoping to sell a bigger hype for more money later.

      • barsoap@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        OpenAI will fail. StabilityAI will fail. CivitAI will prevail, mark my words.

    • spiderman@ani.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Yeah, can make some products better but most of the products these days that use AI, it doesn’t actually need them. It’s annoying to use products that actively shovel AI when it doesn’t even need it.

      • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Ya know what pfoduct MIGHT be better with AI?

        Toasters. They have ONE JOB, and everybody agrees their toaster is crap. But you’re not going to buy another toaster, because that too will be crap.

        How about a toaster, that accurately, and evenly toasts your bread, and then DOESN’T give you a heart attack at 5am when you’re still half asleep???

        IS THAT TOO MUCH TO ASK???

    • peto (he/him)@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      A lot of it is follow the leader type bullshit. For companies in areas where AI is actually beneficial they have already been implementing it for years, quietly because it isn’t something new or exceptional. It is just the tool you use for solving certain problems.

      Investors going to bubble though.

    • themurphy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Definitely. Many companies have implemented AI without thinking with 3 brain cells.

      Great and useful implementation of AI exists, but it’s like 1/100 right now in products.

      • floofloof@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        If my employer is anything to go by, much of it is just unimaginative businesspeople who are afraid of missing out on what everyone else is selling.

        At work we were instructed to shove ChatGPT into our systems about a month after it became a thing. It makes no sense in our system and many of us advised management it was irresponsible since it’s giving people advice of very sensitive matters without any guarantee that advice is any good. But no matter, we had to shove it in there, with small print to cover our asses. I bet no one even uses it, but sales can tell customers the product is “AI-driven”.

      • PerogiBoi@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        My old company before they laid me off laid off our entire HR and Comms teams in exchange for ChatGPT Enterprise.

        “We can just have an AI chatbot for HR and pay inquiries and ask Dall-e to create icons and other content”.

        A friend who still works there told me they’re hiring a bunch of “prompt engineers” to improve the quality of the AI outputs haha

        • verity_kindle@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          I’m sorry. Hope you find a better job, on the inevitable downswing of the hype, when someone realizes that a prompt can’t replace a person in customer service. Customers will invest more time, i.e., even wait in a purposely engineered holding music hell, to have a real person listen to them.

        • themurphy@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          That’s an even worse ‘use case’ than I could imagine.

          HR should be one of the most protected fields against AI, because you actually need a human resource.

          And “prompt engineer” is so stupid. The “job” is only necessary because the AI doesn’t understand what you want to do well enough. The only productive guy you could hire would be a programmer or something, that could actually tinker with the AI.