775
Generative AI Is an Engineering Disaster. A shockingly inefficient trillion-dollar project.
(www.theatlantic.com)
this post was submitted on 15 Jul 2026
775 points (97.5% liked)
Technology
86580 readers
3411 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I think you misunderstood. I don’t believe calling LLMs “stochastic parrots” is accurate, but I think that dismissing them as such puts them at the same level as astrology, in the sense that both would be useless in order to predict an outcome based purely on their inputs.
In other words, I do think that LLMs have some value to them, even when issues like “hallucinations” will never be resolved.
On the other hand, I don’t think astrology is valuable at all. There hasn’t been a single accurate prediction made by astrologers that could be replicated within the same conditions at a different time. Descriptions of phenomena in astrology are also deliberately vague, so they could be “massaged” to fit the outcomes. Astrology is, at its core and necessarily, post hoc, so suggesting that it is a misunderstood discipline based on actual science is just naive.