this post was submitted on 09 Sep 2026
747 points (94.5% liked)
Fuck AI
8732 readers
1521 users here now
"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"
A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype.
Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.
AI, in this case, refers to LLMs, GPT technology, and anything listed as "AI" meant to increase market valuations.
Rules:
- Relevant posts only.
- No bigotry.
- No misinformation.
- No NSFW/NSFL content without being labeled NSFW or being in an appropriately-labeled spoiler tag.
- This isn't a place to talk about the cons and (supposed) pros of AI for different use cases. This is /c/fuck_ai .
- Especially no AI advocacy.
- No AI-generated content. If you want to post examples of AI failing hillariously, there are other communities for that like !ArtificialIgnorance@lemmy.ca .
- Venting is part of the purpose of this community, but don't aim frustration or accusations at other users.
- These rules are a living document that may change in the future.
You can help the mod team by making your reports detailed.
Effective reports:
- "The third image is a well-known anti-semitic trope"
- "Claiming that 'agentic AI' can outperform humans at all jobs is misinformation"
Less effective reports:
- "Breaks rules"
- "Misinformation"
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
You're committing the blunder of alienating your allies. Complaining, that "the STEM bros" didn't push back against AI earlier, is just gatekeeping.
This is kind of a case of individuals from specific industries or mediums of study championing AI while other individuals from those same industries or mediums of study denounce it and speak against it.
I don't think we should pretend that the two groups are mutually inclusive. But at the same time, there's definitely people working in STEM who were very happy to champion AI and use it. The scientists in the article are an example of people who may have only used AI and not championed it, but the fact that they did use the AI LLM is not in doubt. This result is of their own making given that all of the warning signs have been there for a couple of years now at least.
We can't pretend that all of STEM emphatically denounced AI. But we shouldn't pretend that All of STEM championed it either.
It was "STEM bros" that continued to champion generative AI and make it possible for it to become the planet-sized threat it has turned into now. It was "STEM bros" that consistently belittled the concerns of those in the arts and the humanities when they were warning against what their creations were doing. It was "STEM bros" that kept telling everyone they were making a big deal out of nothing, that the environmental effects were overblown, that it's a whole lot of fearmongering.
They are not allies to those of us, in STEM and in other disciplines alike, that have been trying to hold the line against generative AI from the start. For them to turn against it now that it's suddenly infringing on their careers is self-serving and while I do not begrudge their support I will sure as hell not genuflect and thank them for it.
You're over-generalizing and it's leading you to bad conclusions, which is why people are downvoting you.
Goomba fallacy
edit: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Goomba_fallacy
People are also allowed to have contradicting opinions. People aren't perfectly ordered logical reasoning machines.
Agreed. I just wanted to push back on the idea that 'stem bros' are a pro-ai monolith
No we fucking didn't. Lol. Those are tech bros. Myself in the vast majority of my colleagues would never advocate for releasing products that were dangerous and half cocked. This is from somebody who spent his entire career studying artificial intelligence amongst other things.
Us security nerds are right in the center of STEM and we have been vocal the whole time
It's called STEAM now to include art.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STEAM_education