Too spicy?
this post was submitted on 18 May 2026
687 points (95.7% liked)
memes
21282 readers
2534 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads/AI Slop
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Do you belive current iteration of AI has the potential to become superhuman? I think it's like trying to get to the moon by building a better ladder.
LLMs are a dead end.
Their only value is showing how fucked up our society is.
Suddenly and very publicly copyrights only matter if you're poor, electricity is wasted on the poor, water is not for the poor... it's always been like this, but the LLM bandwagon really showcased all of that in one shiny package.
The only good thing could be gathering public knowledge into a single space, but they don't even do that.
So it's all net negative in my eyes.
I respectfully disagree with the dead end part of your argument. A dead end would be if they provided no value.
While the environmental and social downsides are massive negatives on the tech, it is actually doing something.
Past iterations are completely useless, but more recent iterations show us a more polished side to LLMs that actually do enhance how we do some things.
Is it worth it? My gut says no, but its both too late and too early to call it. (late in the environmental and societal impact, too early in the tech iteration)
As far as the "dead end" argument goes, I have to say that's a hard disagree. Humanity is filled with technological advances that "stand on the shoulders of giants" and improve on previous techs. Even if LLMs themselves don't prove to be the thing that we've been promised by the people driving it, it is taking us one step closer to AGI (whether that's a good goal or not, that's still up for debate)
From here on, I think there's still quite a bit these models can improve, and I hope a lot of that improvement goes into making it more energy efficient, more water efficient in turn.
If by a dead end you mean that we can't reach an AGI from an LLM, I think that's correct, however an LLM might help us figure out what is needed for an AGI.
If it was used in a research as a step? Perchance.
Pouring everything we have into it? Dumbest fucking decision of our lives.
We could have put all that effort into previous versions and could tweak them enough to gather perhaps slightly worse results, maybe even better, we will never know.
Making this shit more efficient is to me also dumb.
What in the fuck are we doing that requires this shit? It helps with coding? We can make better frameworks. Translations? We had those before, even TTS. Emails? Just use a template. The other side is not reading that slop anyway. So what exactly are we doing here?
On crab god you didn't actually just say that
Can you elaborate please?
You didn’t actually say what you think LLM’s are enhancing. Just that you feel that they are. Honestly I think that’s the biggest part, they’re big shiny things that look like they’re doing a lot. But they actually aren’t. LLMs are chatbots and they will never be anything more than just chatbots.
Summarizing and finding codeblocks. Fucking A+.
So much so, that it's pretty much 100% necessary in software engineering now. And I hate it that I'm forced to use something that I know is so detrimental in other aspects.
I’ve been a software developer for over 15 years, I’ve never used one. It’s not necessary at all.
I used it to make a dialog system in a video game. It made it, but it was needlessly complex and ten times as long as the code needed to be. No thanks, i don't need a buggy mess that's unmaintainable.
No, the tech ran into diminishing returns. That's been studied. In the end you're adding another datacenter just to get 1% better output.
LLMs in itself don't do much because they're inconsistent, they lack clarity and data structure. But, on the other hand, classical (deterministic) software has always been rigid, stiff, inflexible. I think it's like a human, the deterministic software is the skeleton (bones), the LLMs are the muscles.
Just like a muscle would not at all stand without a bone and would collapse immediately, so are LLMs extremely useless in themselves because they have no consistency. However, i think that if you combine classical software with LLMs, you can arrive at better results than in any other way. It's like adding a muscle and a bone together to make a functioning system.
I'm not sure I understand. Inconsistent input to a rigid program gives inconsistent output. Consistent input to an LLM gives inconsistent result.
I'm a programmer. Can you tell me the specification of what you want the rigid classical software to do?
Regardless, if someone's trying to get to the moon so they can enslave us all and rule over us from their moon fortress, I don't care if all they've got is a really long ladder, I'm breaking the ladder.
No but if you don't try, you won't find where the Goblins are hiding.
Dont know, dont care, dont want it