this post was submitted on 21 Aug 2025
486 points (98.4% liked)

Technology

74265 readers
4331 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. 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.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Money quote:

Excel requires some skill to use (to the point where high-level Excel is a competitive sport), and AI is mostly an exercise in deskilling its users and humanity at large.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] echodot@feddit.uk 3 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

There isn't propaganda against AI, it's totally grassroots because companies are overselling it.

[–] Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world -2 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (2 children)

No it isn't. There is 100% propaganda and media targeting communities to spread it.

The Gap between peoples opinion towards AI in everyday life vs people on Lemmy is massive and a good indicator that Lemmy is astroturfed to be toxic towards it. People who are influenced cannot see it, outsiders can though. It's like seeing right wingers talk about immigrants. They'll never be able to see how their news and media influence them. That is their truth and it's as true to them as hate towards AI is towards lemmings in places like c/technology

Look at the articles posted, the headlines, the appeals used, the comments. It has all the markers of an Astro turf campaign.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 1 points 24 minutes ago

The Gap between peoples opinion towards AI in everyday life vs people on Lemmy is massive and a good indicator that Lemmy is astroturfed

By who? Your conspiracy theory makes no sense. Why would anyone want to do that.

[–] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 3 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Lemmy is pretty consistent with the people I know IRL in terms of opinions on AI.

[–] Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world -1 points 4 hours ago (3 children)

Not where I am. I haven't met anyone irl that has any spite with AI. They think it's interesting. Have tried it a few times. But nobody is out there saying fuck AI.

[–] HugeNerd@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 hours ago

I fed AI all my Lemmy posts and asked it for a portrait of the artist. Not bad, down to my 6 fingers.

[–] theunknownmuncher@lemmy.world 2 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

No, I'd definitely agree that AI sentiment overall is pretty negative. I am not such a hardliner, but they are definitely out there. I don't see it as astroturfing at all, to even suggest this is ironic because LLMs are the ultimate astroturfing tool. The institutions capable of astroturfing do support AI and are using it. What institution or organization are you accusing of anti-AI astroturfing, exactly? This question requires an answer for that claim to be taken seriously.

IMO the problem is not LLMs itself, which are very compelling and interesting for strictly language processing and enable software usecases that were almost impossible to implement programmatically before; the problem is how LLMs are being used incorrectly for usecases that they are not suited for, due to the massive investment and hype. "We spent all this money on this so now we have to use it for everything". It's wrong. LLMs are not knowledge stores, they are provably bad at summarization and as a search interface, and they should especially not be used for decision making in any context. And people are reacting to the way LLMs are being forced into all of these roles.

People also take strong issue with their perceived violation of intellectual property and training on copyrighted information, viewing AI generated arts as derivative and theft.

Plus, there are very negative consequences to generative AI that aren't yet fully addressed. Environmental impact. Deepfakes. They're a propaganda machine; they can be censored and reflect biases of the institutions that control them. Parasocial relationships, misguided self-validating "therapy". They degrade human creativity and become a crutch. Impacts on education and cheating. Replacement of jobs and easier exploitation of workers. Surveillance.

All of these things are valid and I hear them all from people around me, not just on the internet.

[–] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 2 points 3 hours ago

That was the initial impression of it. Now that we've had more experience with it and learned that it can't be relied on, perception has changed. It is oversold and the costs are not worth what we are getting out of it.