this post was submitted on 09 Jan 2026
762 points (99.1% liked)

Fuck AI

5268 readers
2218 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.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] gustofwind@lemmy.world 143 points 1 week ago (5 children)

AI has achieved the intelligence of the average voter

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 20 points 1 week ago
[–] Clent@lemmy.dbzer0.com 20 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I'm convinced this is why people are so seemingly impressed with AI. It's smarter than the average person because the average person is that ignorant. To these people these things are ungodly smart and because of the puffery they don't feel talked down to which increases their perception of it's intelligence; it tells them how smart and clever they are in a way no sentient entity would ever do.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] LemmyKnowsBest@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

Hey don't insult the average voter like that. This post demonstrates that ai has achieved the dementia level of Trump.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Mvlad88@lemmy.world 56 points 1 week ago (4 children)
[–] thesdev@feddit.org 54 points 1 week ago (1 children)

So when one uses AI on Ecosia, are they helping to plant a tree or burn one? Perhaps it's a toss-up.

[–] X@piefed.world 19 points 1 week ago

Task unsuccessfully failed successfully.

[–] kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world 17 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Something, something "leap years". Well that explains it.

[–] jaredwhite@humansare.social 9 points 1 week ago

That answer was wrong. So therefore, that answer was correct. No. Yes. Maybe.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 47 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (10 children)

It's pretty obvious how this happened.

All the data it has been trained on said "next year is 2026" and "2027 is two years from now" and now that it is 2026 it doesn't actually change the training data. It doesn't know what year it is, it only knows how to regurgitate answers it was already trained on.

[–] crmsnbleyd@sopuli.xyz 13 points 1 week ago (2 children)

nah, training data is not why it answered this (otherwise it would have training data from many different years, way more than of 2025)

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

There's data weights for recency, so after a certain point "next year is 2026" will stop being weighted over "next year is 2027"

It's early in the year, so that threshold wasn't crossed yet.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[–] samus12345@sh.itjust.works 23 points 1 week ago (2 children)
[–] YoSoySnekBoi@kbin.earth 18 points 1 week ago (2 children)
[–] samus12345@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 week ago (2 children)
[–] Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It’s amazing how it works with like every LLM

[–] samus12345@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I'm guessing they're still stuck on thinking it's 2025 somehow, which is pretty crazy since keeping accurate track of dates and numbers SHOULD be the most basic thing an AI can do.

[–] naught@sh.itjust.works 15 points 1 week ago (1 children)

AI doesn't "know" anything. It's a big statistical probability model that predicts words based on context. It is very specifically BAD at math and dates etc. because it works based on words, not numbers. Models can't do math

[–] samus12345@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 week ago

Yeah, I'm being colloquial with saying "thinking," and that makes sense! Computers that are bad at math, what genius!

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Actually, it's what traditional software should be very good at, LLM is actually inherently kind of bad at it. Much work has gone into getting the LLMs to detect mathy stuff and try to shuffle off to some other technology that can cope with it.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Copilot was interesting: Is it 2027 next year? Not quite! Next year will be 2026 + 1 = 2027, but since we’re currently in 2026, the next year is 2027 only after this year ends. So yes—2027 is next year, starting on January 1, 2027.

[–] Ethalis@jlai.lu 20 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I love how overexplained this wrong answer is

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] criticon@lemmy.ca 18 points 1 week ago

I recently found this (it can be replicated with many values):

[–] Janx@piefed.social 17 points 1 week ago

Yeah, this "sequence guesser" is definitely something we should have do all the coding, and control the entire Internet.. 

[–] buddascrayon@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Talking to AI is like talking to an 8-year-old. Has just enough information to be confidently wrong about everything.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] stupidcasey@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago

TBF how things are going we will give up the Gregorian calendar this year in favor of a random number generator.

[–] altphoto@lemmy.today 12 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

Obviously its 2012 again!

2013 never happened. We just keep repeating 2012 over and over to see if we can make the world end this time around.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Mulligrubs@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

This is worth at least 500 trillion dollars!

We have a virtual parrot, it's not "intelligence" in any way. So many suckers

[–] CaptDust@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 week ago

Next year (2028) will be when it finally takes over everything

[–] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Yeah, "AI" is just statistical analysis. There's more data in it's database that indicates the 2027 is not year and only a few days worth of data that indicates that it is. Since there's more data indicating 2027 is not next year, it chooses that as the correct answer.

LLMs are a useful tool if you know what it is, it's strengths and weaknesses. But it's not intelligent and doesn't understand how things work. But if you have some fuzzy data you want analyzed and validate the results, it can save some time to get to a starting point. It's kinda like wikipedia in a way, you get to a starting point faster, but have to take things with a grain of salt and put some effort make sure things are accurate.

[–] pez@piefed.blahaj.zone 4 points 1 week ago

Google pulled the AI overview from the search, but "is it 2027 next year ai overview" was a suggested search because this screenshot is making the rounds. The AI overview now has all the discussion of this error in it's data set and mentions it in it's reply but still fails.

[–] leftzero@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Can we be done with this whole years thing?

It's very evidently not working out.

Every one of them is orders of magnitude worse than the one before.

Lets just not have a new year, just stop here, and try to go back if possible?

[–] kkj@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I'm still not entirely convinced that we've left 2016.

[–] assassinatedbyCIA@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

This is why I can’t buy dram

[–] kadu@scribe.disroot.org 7 points 1 week ago

(this is when your question is relevant)

[–] Shanmugha@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago

Definitely killer of all jobs. Sad part is that I'm guessing it will take many lives before the hysteria is over

[–] Kowowow@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 week ago

I could totally relate id the AI claimed it was still like 2020 or something

"Huh, me too buddy"

[–] ytg@sopuli.xyz 4 points 1 week ago

I guess they're trained on words, not numbers

PhD level, I tell ya.

[–] Blaster_M@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)
[–] Etterra@discuss.online 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Seven acres of rainforest were burned and 37,000 gallons of water were wasted to answer this question.

[–] lividweasel@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

…but at least the line went up a bit. That’s all that matters! 📈

[–] Sam_Bass@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago
[–] WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today 3 points 1 week ago

This isn't just the machine being ignorant or wrong.

This is a level of artificial stupidity that is downright eldritch and incomprehensible

load more comments
view more: next ›