this post was submitted on 30 May 2025
282 points (96.1% liked)

Fuck AI

2910 readers
952 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.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The MAHA report got me thinking. We need a concise slur for people who blindly copy and paste LLM outputs. It needs to say that the person is lazy, ignorant, gullible, disrespectful, and dishonest all at once. Something along the lines of NPC. Maybe parrot? But that’s not too catchy. Any ideas?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Poayjay@lemmy.world 117 points 3 days ago (9 children)

We need another one for people who think posting, “I asked chatGPT and this is what it said…” is in anyway contributing to anything.

[–] BertramDitore@lemm.ee 58 points 3 days ago (2 children)

I stopped listening to a daily news podcast partly because the hosts did this live on the air. They’d ask ChatGPT for a statistic, then say “ChatGPT says it’s 37% of Americans” or whatever. They never fact-checked it, and based on how consistently wrong LLMs have been in my experience, it called into question everything else they said.

It’s a great way to instantly lose trust in another person’s abilities.

[–] notfromhere@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 day ago

67% of statistics are made up on the spot.

[–] glaber@lemm.ee 9 points 3 days ago (1 children)

That might be one of the most unhinged used of ChatGPT I've seen yet. There's virtually no linguistic difference between saying one number or another, all possible answers are gonna look identical to the machine. I'd like to see these slopgobblers try to ask the same question several times and see the results

[–] olafurp@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

Yeah it's basically asking "give me a statistic that feeds the current Internet vibe on the topic"

[–] DeathsEmbrace@lemm.ee 20 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

The French have a good inside joke. Just call them cat farts.

[–] biofaust@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

I see what you did there. But would you call the perpetrators farts or the slop they produce?

[–] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 13 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

That seems to be a subset of the same thing to me.

[–] 3dmvr@lemm.ee 1 points 2 days ago

Evertime I tell them that I also have access to chatgpt and if I wanted to ask it I would, I only asked real ppl for answers from real ppl, if you need to ai or even use google, I'm good, I can do that on my own.

[–] callouscomic@lemm.ee 4 points 3 days ago

There's a few people at my work who do this. They'll straight up say it out loud in meetings.

[–] jagged_circle@feddit.nl 1 points 2 days ago

What's the difference?

[–] Kichae@lemmy.ca 3 points 3 days ago

I asked a Llama model on Hugging Face, and this is what it said...

[–] x00z@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I asked ChatGPT and this is what it said:

An argument for using ChatGPT and sharing its response is that sharing what ChatGPT said can, in fact, contribute meaningfully—just like quoting a book, article, or expert. If the AI’s response adds insight, solves a problem, or sparks discussion, then referencing it is a valid form of contribution. Dismissing it entirely overlooks the evolving role of AI as a tool in public discourse.

I asked grok to summarize this for me, and it said:

Regarding "white genocide" in South Africa, some claim it's real, citing farm attacks and "Kill the Boer" as evidence. Interestingly, ...

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 0 points 3 days ago

anyway

any way

"He who is without sin..."