The business model of Tinder etc. isn't to find you the love of your life, it's to keep you on their site, making you pay for as long as possible.
-
@jwildeboer this comparison is flawed imho. It suggests one uses LLM tools to find *the* answer.
But it’s not.
They are very addictive tools offering your brain a shortcut in lots of cases to find *all* answers. Up to a point where it’s hard to convince your brain *not* to take this shortcut.
(And tbf: web search is dead with the flood of LLM generated and ad infested content farms which does not help at all. Maybe it’s time to bring Yahoo back
)@maschinentraum Every comparison is flawed. The comparison is not the point. You find "addictive" the better term, and you are also right. What they have in common, though, is that both aim to keep you locked in, ideally indefintely.
-
The business model of Tinder etc. isn't to find you the love of your life, it's to keep you on their site, making you pay for as long as possible.
The business model of Big AI isn't to solve your problems with the least amount of tokens. It is to keep you close enough to *think* you might soon have the solution while you keep on spending more and more tokens.
Both (and many other services) make their money based on hope, not on results. That's my opinion.
See also weight loss companies!!
-
The business model of Tinder etc. isn't to find you the love of your life, it's to keep you on their site, making you pay for as long as possible.
The business model of Big AI isn't to solve your problems with the least amount of tokens. It is to keep you close enough to *think* you might soon have the solution while you keep on spending more and more tokens.
Both (and many other services) make their money based on hope, not on results. That's my opinion.
@jwildeboer When I took a first look at gen ai it reminded me of gaming, full stop.
It had that pleasure of a simulation game, "look at me level up my cooking skill!" while not teaching any cooking skills.
But, the folks selling it are dullards who want to look like serious business men solving serious problems.
People love games and still would have bought and paid for the service BUT it would have carried no, "omg, he's saving the world" vibes.
Dating stuff is similar.
-
So in my personal opinion, just as with many other things, it is better, though much more work, to be in control and to own the tools you use. Domain-specific, small LLMs work. Are they worth it? You will only know if you own them and have to shoulder the full cost yourself.
Digital autonomy or sovereignty comes from taking that perspective and responsibility. It is also defining for your personal autonomy.
That's my food for thought that I share with you. Think about it before you "yes, but".
@jwildeboer well said.
-
@jwildeboer When I took a first look at gen ai it reminded me of gaming, full stop.
It had that pleasure of a simulation game, "look at me level up my cooking skill!" while not teaching any cooking skills.
But, the folks selling it are dullards who want to look like serious business men solving serious problems.
People love games and still would have bought and paid for the service BUT it would have carried no, "omg, he's saving the world" vibes.
Dating stuff is similar.
@jwildeboer I was in on the early days of WoW and I think many of the folks who are positively obsessed with ai are in that same rut I was in when WoW was my whole life but they aren't interacting with people and community in the way I was.
Community and friends pulled me through that era and encouraged me to finish me degree.
The ugliest thing about the ai industry is that they want to fully isolate users and replace community.
-
R relay@relay.publicsquare.global shared this topic
-
@jwildeboer I was in on the early days of WoW and I think many of the folks who are positively obsessed with ai are in that same rut I was in when WoW was my whole life but they aren't interacting with people and community in the way I was.
Community and friends pulled me through that era and encouraged me to finish me degree.
The ugliest thing about the ai industry is that they want to fully isolate users and replace community.
@clarablackink @jwildeboer Let's be very honest, isolating us has been a welcome side effect of many "big new things" of the last decade or so. The irony is that they used technology that I was almost certain would unite us.
-
@clarablackink @jwildeboer Let's be very honest, isolating us has been a welcome side effect of many "big new things" of the last decade or so. The irony is that they used technology that I was almost certain would unite us.
@ainmosni @jwildeboer It is intentional.
The reasons I think this are two fold:
They themselves don't care for people and like the idea of a world where everything except them is essentially an npc
Just...so many of them are sex pests and sex pests are really good at isolating victims. There's a pervasive mindset that runs through this particular group of tech folks that is entirely calculated and folks need to see it instead of explaining it away as an accident.
-
@ainmosni @jwildeboer It is intentional.
The reasons I think this are two fold:
They themselves don't care for people and like the idea of a world where everything except them is essentially an npc
Just...so many of them are sex pests and sex pests are really good at isolating victims. There's a pervasive mindset that runs through this particular group of tech folks that is entirely calculated and folks need to see it instead of explaining it away as an accident.
@ainmosni @jwildeboer The philosophical headspace that these folks operate in is shaping the tech in deliberate ways.
Not necessarily cackling and rubbing hands together deliberate (though...the Epstein files actually include that and its...yeah).
It isn't a grand conspiracy but it is still this specific culture where consent doesn't exist and people are objects to be used. And it ties back to so many things about how these folks view power and influence that differs from the rest of us.
-
@ainmosni @jwildeboer It is intentional.
The reasons I think this are two fold:
They themselves don't care for people and like the idea of a world where everything except them is essentially an npc
Just...so many of them are sex pests and sex pests are really good at isolating victims. There's a pervasive mindset that runs through this particular group of tech folks that is entirely calculated and folks need to see it instead of explaining it away as an accident.
@clarablackink @jwildeboer I don't think it's just the sex pest thing, but it does factor in. Although it might be correlation instead of causation because I also see these other factors:
- The upper class definitely has class solidarity, as evidenced by the Epstein files.
- It's standard cult leader procedure to isolate people, as it makes them easy to manipulate.
- Having the lower classes collectively organise is their biggest nightmare.
-
@maschinentraum Every comparison is flawed. The comparison is not the point. You find "addictive" the better term, and you are also right. What they have in common, though, is that both aim to keep you locked in, ideally indefintely.
@jwildeboer @maschinentraum Eager to hear how you address the negative externalities of the LLM training process as well as the inherent epistemic injustice, attacks on social epistemology, etc
-
@jwildeboer @maschinentraum Eager to hear how you address the negative externalities of the LLM training process as well as the inherent epistemic injustice, attacks on social epistemology, etc
@bms48 Ideally, domain-specific LLMs are trained on on your own data, not on questionable data sources from "somewhere". The training runs use far less resources than "big world" models. So much less that training and inference can be completely done in-house with modest investments in hardware. To reduce costs further, you could think of cross-vertical cooperation to enrich the data sources while keeping compliance secured. Etc. @maschinentraum
-
@bms48 Ideally, domain-specific LLMs are trained on on your own data, not on questionable data sources from "somewhere". The training runs use far less resources than "big world" models. So much less that training and inference can be completely done in-house with modest investments in hardware. To reduce costs further, you could think of cross-vertical cooperation to enrich the data sources while keeping compliance secured. Etc. @maschinentraum
@jwildeboer @maschinentraum I think we can agree LLMs are an example of what embedded deep learning techniques in AI research can do, in terms of search space and pattern matching as techniques, but intelligent it most certainly isn't, and their financialization is creating societal problems that may take decades to walk back.
-
The business model of Tinder etc. isn't to find you the love of your life, it's to keep you on their site, making you pay for as long as possible.
The business model of Big AI isn't to solve your problems with the least amount of tokens. It is to keep you close enough to *think* you might soon have the solution while you keep on spending more and more tokens.
Both (and many other services) make their money based on hope, not on results. That's my opinion.
-
The business model of Tinder etc. isn't to find you the love of your life, it's to keep you on their site, making you pay for as long as possible.
The business model of Big AI isn't to solve your problems with the least amount of tokens. It is to keep you close enough to *think* you might soon have the solution while you keep on spending more and more tokens.
Both (and many other services) make their money based on hope, not on results. That's my opinion.
@jwildeboer *This is a post about the pharmaceutical industry.*
-
@maschinentraum Every comparison is flawed. The comparison is not the point. You find "addictive" the better term, and you are also right. What they have in common, though, is that both aim to keep you locked in, ideally indefintely.
@jwildeboer this is something we totally can agree on
️ -
So in my personal opinion, just as with many other things, it is better, though much more work, to be in control and to own the tools you use. Domain-specific, small LLMs work. Are they worth it? You will only know if you own them and have to shoulder the full cost yourself.
Digital autonomy or sovereignty comes from taking that perspective and responsibility. It is also defining for your personal autonomy.
That's my food for thought that I share with you. Think about it before you "yes, but".
@jwildeboer Absolutely. And let's not forget the sheer *joy* of being in control of your own computing. Of understanding how things work. Of being able to fix things when they break.
-
The business model of Tinder etc. isn't to find you the love of your life, it's to keep you on their site, making you pay for as long as possible.
The business model of Big AI isn't to solve your problems with the least amount of tokens. It is to keep you close enough to *think* you might soon have the solution while you keep on spending more and more tokens.
Both (and many other services) make their money based on hope, not on results. That's my opinion.
@jwildeboer The LLM AI make lots of mistakes and one can't trust their answers and shouldn't give personal information to them but:
1. I use Claude code (code agent) and it's very helpful in coding speed and finding performance issues and finding cause of bugs. They are definitely great technology and tool.
2. I used general LLM AI such as chatgpt and it guided me through some problems very fast that the information of it was very hard to find with searching in websites and would take me few hours to search. -
R relay@relay.an.exchange shared this topic
