this post was submitted on 04 Apr 2025
806 points (97.5% liked)

Technology

68434 readers
5194 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
 

US experts who work in artificial intelligence fields seem to have a much rosier outlook on AI than the rest of us.

In a survey comparing views of a nationally representative sample (5,410) of the general public to a sample of 1,013 AI experts, the Pew Research Center found that "experts are far more positive and enthusiastic about AI than the public" and "far more likely than Americans overall to believe AI will have a very or somewhat positive impact on the United States over the next 20 years" (56 percent vs. 17 percent). And perhaps most glaringly, 76 percent of experts believe these technologies will benefit them personally rather than harm them (15 percent).

The public does not share this confidence. Only about 11 percent of the public says that "they are more excited than concerned about the increased use of AI in daily life." They're much more likely (51 percent) to say they're more concerned than excited, whereas only 15 percent of experts shared that pessimism. Unlike the majority of experts, just 24 percent of the public thinks AI will be good for them, whereas nearly half the public anticipates they will be personally harmed by AI.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] SSNs4evr@leminal.space 16 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The problem could be that, with all the advancements in technology just since 1970, all the medical advancements, all the added efficiencies at home and in the workplace, the immediate knowledge-availability of the internet, all the modern conveniences, and the ability to maintain distant relationships through social media, most of our lives haven't really improved.

We are more rushed and harried than ever, life expectancy (in the US) has decreased, we've gone from 1 working adult in most families to 2 working adults (with more than 1 job each), income has gone down. Recreation has moved from wholesome outdoor activities to an obese population glued to various screens and gaming systems.

The "promise of the future" through technological advancement, has been a pretty big letdown. What's AI going to bring? More loss of meaningful work? When will technology bring fewer working hours and more income - at the same time? When will technology solve hunger, famine, homelessness, mental health issues, and when will it start cleaning my freaking house and making me dinner?

When all the jobs are gone, how beneficial will our overlords be, when it comes to universal basic income? Most of the time, it seems that more bad comes from out advancements than good. It's not that the advancements aren't good, it's that they're immediately turned to wartime use considerations and profiteering for a very few.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Clent@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 2 days ago (3 children)

I do as a software engineer. The fad will collapse. Software engineering hiring will increase but the pipeline of new engineers will is dry because no one wants to enter the career with companies hanging ai over everyone's heads. Basic supply and demand says my skillset will become more valuable.

Someone will need to clean up the ai slop. I've already had similar pistons where I was brought into clean up code bases that failed being outsourced.

Ai is simply the next iteration. The problem is always the same business doesn't know what they really want and need and have no ability to assess what has been delivered.

[–] mctoasterson@reddthat.com 3 points 2 days ago

AI can look at a bajillion examples of code and spit out its own derivative impersonation of that code.

AI isn't good at doing a lot of other things software engineers actually do. It isn't very good at attending meetings, gathering requirements, managing projects, writing documentation for highly-industry-specific products and features that have never existed before, working user tickets, etc.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] sheetzoos@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

New technologies are not the issue. The problem is billionaires will fuck it up because they can't control their insatiable fucking greed.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] pjwestin@lemmy.world 68 points 3 days ago (12 children)

Maybe that's because every time a new AI feature rolls out, the product it's improving gets substantially worse.

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 44 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Maybe that's because they're using AI to replace people, and the AI does a worse job.

Meanwhile, the people are also out of work.

Lose - Lose.

[–] null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com 21 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Even if you're not "out of work", your work becomes more chaotic and less fulfilling in the name of productivity.

When I started 20 years ago, you could round out a long day with a few hours of mindless data entry or whatever. Not anymore.

A few years ago I could talk to people or maybe even write a nice email communicating a complex topic. Now chatGPT writes the email and I check it.

It's just shit honestly. I'd rather weave baskets and die at 40 years old of a tooth infection than spend an additional 30 years wallowing in self loathing and despair.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
[–] EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

AI has it's place, but they need to stop trying to shoehorn it into anything and everything. It's the new "internet of things" cramming of internet connectivity into shit that doesn't need it.

[–] poopkins@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago

You're saying the addition of Copilot into MS Paint is anything short of revolutionary? You heretic.

[–] briever@lemmy.world 14 points 2 days ago

For once, most Americans are right.

[–] kreskin@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago

Its just going to help industry provide inferior services and make more profit. Like AI doctors.

[–] Sam_Bass@lemmy.world 16 points 2 days ago (1 children)

So far AI has only aggravated me by interrupting my own online activities.

[–] Trilobite@lemm.ee 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

First thing I do is disable it

[–] zarkanian@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I wish it was optional. When I do a search, the AI response is right at the top. If I want AI advice, I'll go ask AI. I don't use a search engine to get answers from AI!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] TommySoda@lemmy.world 131 points 3 days ago (7 children)

If it was marketed and used for what it's actually good at this wouldn't be an issue. We shouldn't be using it to replace artists, writers, musicians, teachers, programmers, and actors. It should be used as a tool to make those people's jobs easier and achieve better results. I understand its uses and that it's not a useless technology. The problem is that capitalism and greedy CEOs are ruining the technology by trying to replace everyone but themselves so they can maximize profits.

[–] ohshittheyknow@lemmynsfw.com 44 points 3 days ago

This. It seems like they have tried to shoehorn AI into just about everything but what it is good at.

[–] faltryka@lemmy.world 30 points 3 days ago (8 children)

The natural outcome of making jobs easier in a profit driven business model is to either add more work or reduce the number of workers.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Naevermix@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (3 children)

They're right. What happens to the workers when they're no longer required? The horses faced a similar issue at the advent of the combustion engine. The solution? Considerably fewer horses.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] IndiBrony@lemmy.world 42 points 3 days ago (12 children)

The first thing seen at the top of WhatsApp now is an AI query bar. Who the fuck needs anything related to AI on WhatsApp?

[–] kautau@lemmy.world 14 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Who the fuck needs ~~anything related to AI on~~ WhatsApp?

[–] alphabethunter@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago

Lots of people. I need it because it's how my clients at work prefer to communicate with me, also how all my family members and friends communicate.

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] dylanmorgan@slrpnk.net 54 points 3 days ago (34 children)

It’s not really a matter of opinion at this point. What is available has little if any benefit to anyone who isn’t trying to justify rock bottom wages or sweeping layoffs. Most Americans, and most people on earth, stand to lose far more than they gain from LLMs.

load more comments (34 replies)
[–] FriendBesto@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

I agree. Albeit there are some advantages, of course, I am 100% certain that in the aggregate, it will make people more stupid and gullible.

It is sort of obvious when you engage with the thought, and seek it to its natural conclusion:

https://www.livescience.com/technology/artificial-intelligence/using-ai-reduces-your-critical-thinking-skills-microsoft-study-warns

[–] CancerMancer@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 days ago

Just about every major advance in technology like this enhanced the power of the capitalists who owned it and took power away from the workers who were displaced.

[–] rockettaco37@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago

All it took was for us to destroy our economy using it to figure that out!

[–] ininewcrow@lemmy.ca 48 points 3 days ago (6 children)

This is like asking tobacco farmers what their thoughts are on smoking.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] surph_ninja@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Most people in the early 90’s didn’t have or think they needed a computer.

[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago (2 children)

How did those barbarians sit on the toilet without memes to scroll?

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago (2 children)

That was the job of reader's digest.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)

remember when tech companies did fun events with actual interesting things instead of spending three hours on some new stupid ai feature?

[–] moonlight@fedia.io 21 points 3 days ago (6 children)

Depends on what we mean by "AI".

Machine learning? It's already had a huge effect, drug discovery alone is transformative.

LLMs and the like? Yeah I'm not sure how positive these are. I don't think they've actually been all that impactful so far.

Once we have true machine intelligence, then we have the potential for great improvements in daily life and society, but that entirely depends on how it will be used.

It could be a bridge to post-scarcity, but under capitalism it's much more likely it will erode the working class further and exacerbate inequality.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›