this post was submitted on 09 Nov 2026
514 points (95.9% liked)

Fuck AI

8732 readers
1412 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:

You can help the mod team by making your reports detailed.

Effective reports:

Less effective reports:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] DupaCycki@lemmy.world 3 points 1 hour ago

What the hell is artificial superintelligence?

[–] wampus@lemmy.ca 8 points 2 hours ago

Sounds sorta... silly, honestly. Yeah, we need a course correction on AI, or more, we need a significant course correction on big tech. But a city council 'banning' it, without understanding / clarity on what they're banning, is nuts.

Like here they define a bit clearer what they're banning --

ban autonomous systems that can modify their own core algorithms, run code outside their initial sandbox or perform complex tasks without continuous human oversight if those tasks could affect municipal networks, banking, financial markets or public safety.

Most enterprise firewalls would fall into this category, email filters too. Got an email system that automatically updates its algorithm to block malicious attackers? Banned. Even a simple script to help with sorting through financial data -- like doing money-laundering/fraud checks overnight, with an outputed report in the morning for staff to investigate when they get in, would potentially fit the ban criteria.

Most 24/7 continuous monitoring systems that use algorithms to send alerts/notify humans would fall into this category -- they're specifically designed to watch for complex variable combinations, and then alert humans when potential issues shows up, so they're explicitly designed not to be running "continuously under human oversight".

"AI" is such a broad/undefined term, that blanket banning tends to also ban technology based on algorithms that've been around for multiple decades, without significant issues. Sorta like how the EU's initial AI regulations had to make all these absurd carve outs for things like "Credit Scores", because a credit score is technically an algorithm, and they were legislating algorithms.

The ban's also nearly impossible to enforce, given its scope, and where "AI" has its hooks. Like if you ban AI, but all of Microsoft's products have it entrenched at this point... while I don't agree with it, I guarantee you the government / council would rather be in a state of non-compliance with their own law, rather than use Linux.

[–] Agent641@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

Where do we file applications for the position of city Bladerunner?

[–] Hupf@feddit.org 5 points 8 hours ago

With Artificial Super Intelligence now banned, Sam Altman announced plans to direct more r&d resources towards Artificial General Intelligence instead.

[–] BigDiction@lemmy.world 13 points 13 hours ago

People are talking about the ban itself but in what fucking world would a law only be repealed with consent of “95% of registered voters” LMAO

[–] AVincentInSpace@pawb.social 20 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

What does that mean?

What does this law actually ban? ChatGPT? I think the fuck not.

Does it ban something that doesn't exist yet, but might exist someday? If so, what is it, other than a feel-good measure that does nothing?

[–] michaelmrose@lemmy.world 1 points 18 minutes ago

Basically the definition it uses to define what is banned is so broad it probably makes all computers and smart phones illegal. The simplest thing to do is for someone in the city to argue that its illegal and get it revoked which takes a fraction of 1% of registered voters instead of nearly all of them.

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 1 points 8 hours ago

Apple is putting a tiny LLM on your phone.

I hope this means the "i" in "iPhone" isn't for "indiana".

[–] Etterra@discuss.online 14 points 18 hours ago

Unwanted AI on your smartphone while driving through town? That's a fine and a jail sentence. Genius.

[–] FukOui@lemmy.zip 61 points 1 day ago (6 children)

Don't call it artificial superintellgience FFS ☠️☠️☠️

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] LordMayor@piefed.social 100 points 1 day ago (7 children)

Ughh… don’t call it superintelligence. That’s not a thing.

[–] peopleproblems@lemmy.world 26 points 1 day ago (2 children)

The people pushing it the most are anti-intellectuals.

We need to call it fake intelligence.

[–] abfarid@startrek.website 14 points 1 day ago (2 children)

That's what it's already called, "artificial" is a synonym for "fake" in most contexts.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] NuanceDemon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 1 day ago (3 children)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] WraithGear@lemmy.world 39 points 23 hours ago

you don’t have to change the law if you change what words mean, and in this case, they did not ban llm’s. they banned a thing that does not exist

[–] misterdark@lemmy.world 129 points 1 day ago (4 children)

In the US, you cannot ban people from using an app on their personal phone in your community. This is just ignorant. I'm not an AI bro, but you can't just have each community deciding on what constitutional rights they want to violate.

[–] Fmstrat@lemmy.world 4 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

They're only banning super intelligence. That doesn't exist as a product.

[–] UltraBlack@lemmy.world 2 points 8 hours ago

Well didn't trump rename AI into SI?

[–] Lodespawn@aussie.zone 26 points 1 day ago (9 children)

Not sure freedom to use apps is included in the US Constitution ..

[–] Kewlio250@lemmy.zip 60 points 1 day ago (5 children)

That would likely violate the first amendment. Many of the ways you use your phone are considered forms of speech/expression. Wholesale banning of sectors of these by a government is a legitimate violation of your rights.

Fuck AI, tho.

[–] MountingSuspicion@reddthat.com 40 points 1 day ago (5 children)

Tell that to all the places that banned porn.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] carrylex@lemmy.world 6 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (1 children)
[–] needanke@feddit.org 5 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

Is that the nuke one?

Edit: lokked it up, yes, it is.

[–] NuanceDemon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 30 points 1 day ago (3 children)

This is so dumb and exactly what I would imagine from Indiana. Everyone in here cheering it on is braindead.

Life is never as simple as people like this wish it was.

[–] yeahiknow3@lemmy.world 31 points 23 hours ago (1 children)
[–] NuanceDemon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

The last step is laziness born of becoming jaded. Its easier to generalise, so people tell themselves it was the answer all along. Stupid trap, dont fall for it.

[–] yeahiknow3@lemmy.world 1 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (1 children)

I think having a realistic perspective can be instrumental to making good decisions. A lot of our strategy historically has hinged on the idea that almost everyone is good, and that’s evidently not true.

[–] NuanceDemon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 7 hours ago

Describing people as broadly good is both true and a useless generalisation, hard times can still push good people to do bad things.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Blackfeathr@lemmy.world 51 points 1 day ago (2 children)

How would this be enforced?

[–] BigPotato@lemmy.world 21 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Easy, if a company in Bloomington says "it was just our AI chatbot," busted. If a person says "well, Grok told me," busted - hope you live outside city limits. If a small business uses the slop font, send in the SWAT team, we got 'em boys. Tune all the city's Flock cameras to watch everyone's phones and we'll root out this cancer!

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Neverclear@lemmy.dbzer0.com 18 points 1 day ago (1 children)

https://www.idsnews.com/article/2026/11/bloomington-city-council-ai-commission-member-removal-udo

Superintelligence 

The council also voted on an ordinance that would bar the distribution and deployment of superintelligent artificial intelligence in Bloomington by any person or corporation. The ordinance passed unanimously. 

The ordinance defines superintelligence as AI that outperforms humans at nearly all mental tasks and can act autonomously, such as rewriting its own code or operating without continuous human oversight on tasks that could affect infrastructure, financial markets or public safety. 

This applies to the use of superintelligence in Bloomington through a browser, app or other connection. 

The ordinance acts as an interim public safety measure to the Bloomington Municipal Code. Through this ordinance, the city is allowed to seek civil penalties, injunctive relief and referral to the county prosecutor. 

According to a memo accompanying the ordinance, neither the state nor federal government have enacted safety parameters for artificial superintelligence. To address these dangers during government inaction, the interim public safety perimeter would protect digital networks and local businesses from artificial superintelligence in Bloomington. 

The interim measure will only stay in place during federal and state inaction. If the Indiana General Assembly were to establish a safety framework to address artificial superintelligence, the ordinance would expire 91 days after. 

[–] snooggums@piefed.world 46 points 1 day ago (3 children)

The ordinance defines superintelligence as AI that outperforms humans at nearly all mental tasks and can act autonomously,

Oh, so they didn't actually ban anything.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›