• ghost_laptop@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 days ago

    the issue on ai is actually about tradition vs. modernity, in most cases. if you add up to that the fact that it’s coupled with automation, which a lot of people consider a bad thing because it eliminates jobs from the market. it was capitalism all along…

      • mystic-macaroni@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 days ago

        How separable are the two when scale is needed to run llms effectively? If you’ve used ollama on your own computer you know the limitations of alternatives. When you use big tech’s offerings you are helping to train their models further. Adding to their control. My suggestion isn’t necessarily abstention, but here tech and capitalism seem to be inseparably intertwined.

        • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          10 days ago

          We’re basically in the mainframe era of this tech, but if you have used local models then you know that progress has been absolutely breathtaking in the past year. Qwen 3.6 27b that you can run on a laptop is straight up better than frontier models that were available just a couple of years ago and required a data centre to run. Also, you don’t have to use American models. You can use open models from China, they’re very capable.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          10 days ago

          Socialism takes advanced, industrial production beyond the profit motive and into a consciously planned and pro-social direction. You can have industrial scale without having capitalism.

  • geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    10 days ago

    Based. But the AI slop machine is something to be aware of. AI can get you 90% of the way there nowadays but without the remaining 10% error checking you’re not gonna have a good time.

    • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      10 days ago

      I’d argue it’s more than 10% checking. You really do have to be engaged in the process, and you can’t farm out thinking to the LLM. It’s a great tool for generating code, but you have to be making conscious decisions at the developer. My process has been to come up with a step by step plan, where there are clear and focused deliverables at each stage, and then do commits for each one and review the diff. This way I have a clear context of what the task is doing, and a reasonable amount of code I can read through to do a proper code review. And it’s easy to actually test the functionality out to see that it’s working. If you take this approach, then the tool really can save you a lot of time.

  • notaviking@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 days ago

    It was a totally measured and well thought argument. Not singing Nirvana nor Apocalypse when it comes to AI but embracing technological progress in a measured way