Evangelizing llms is pretty much all you do on here, you have spent an enormous amount of time and effort on them. If you’re not even willing to accept that you have sunk costs relating to genai, your stating “I’m not insecure about this” is really not compelling.

They are really not that distinct, all the models cheat off each other just like they cheat copyrights.

The entire premise of chatbots is to have a simple natural-language interface instead of those scary GUIs and programming languages. The idea that maybe they didn’t know enough about how to interact with ai, and that’s why it failed to help them, is a little silly, and the more you explain how we’re all using ai wrong, the sillier you look.

You’ve obviously sunk a lot of costs into genai, both in time and money, and that is making you defensive. Somebody that isn’t impressed by Claude premium isn’t going to do any of what you suggest, let alone get any more value out of it, and that’s valid for them. You’re not seriously interested in helping them professionally, you are just insecure.

Hot Stories Daily totally real news channel on YouTube. I’m not even linking to it, don’t spread this shit.

convert these Postman JSON collections to JMeter load tests

Just use jmeter! Jmeter and corpo-curl are two different tools, it’s really not that hard to design your own test plans.

I also don’t understand making the receptionist do it, e2e tests are actually important and should be designed by someone familiar with the system they are testing.

Convert the PDF to a fillable form

You mean ocr? The thing that we already had an ai boom/bust cycle about in the 60s?! The thing the USPS has used to read chickenscratch addresses on all envelopes since the 70s?

Here, this project has been filling your exact use case for more than a dozen years now: https://github.com/ocrmypdf

and make sure the fillable fields are properly located between the lines of the field names they correspond to" and then it just does it and now applicants can apply online and you didn’t have to pay an expensive human to do menial one-off work in applications they don’t really know.

There’s a ton of dumb, time-wasting shit you don’t have to do anymore because you can just make the robot do it. It’s not all just straight plagiarism and stealing artwork and dead Internet propaganda-bot garbage. You can use it for good or evil. The power generation and inefficiency are still unsolved problems, the super aggressive build-out arms race is pure idiocy and we absolutely need to slow this whole thing down, and I’ll never forgive these greedy fucks for ruining the PC components market every few years, first crypto now this, but there are use cases that allow people to do things they couldn’t otherwise do.

Properly used, AI is a force multiplier. Improperly used, it’s a resource-burning race to the bottom, but if you can’t think of legitimate uses for a general-purpose software robot you can tell to do tedious stuff in plain language and it’ll just do it with a bit of guidance, then I don’t know what to tell you.

Big wall of nothing, didn’t read.

No regrets

That doesn’t look very structurally sound; I recommend a corbel arch on prod.

I’ve been perfectly clear where I stand, you have been cherry picking definitions to suit your argument this entire thread. I have never conflated gen ai with corporate interests, you can see from my profile that I’m against chatbots of all types, open or closed weights, cloud or local. I am arguing against generative ai, all generative ai, as I have been doing for years. You are making excuses to avoid any self reflection about your chatbot use.

Do you not see how incredibly broad your definition is compared to wikis or mine? I agree that wiki definitions often use qualifiers in order to avoid making absolute statements, but wiki and I absolutely do agree about this.

I am struggling to take your claim of simple miscommunication seriously. The context of the gen ai debate that’s been raging for 3+ years is not in flux: we have all been saying the same things about the same chatbots, and the idea that anti-ai people just hate medicine or weather or animals or whatever is just… deeply disrespectful and annoying. You can at least just learn what we’re opposed to, before defending ai from attacks and arguments that were never made and would be silly to try to make.

No, absolutely false. Generative ai is literally generating text and images or even videos from a prompt. If you conflate everything it’s very easy to dismiss criticism, but if you actually contend with anti-ai arguments you will find they all use this definition.

So you just completely ignore all context? The fact that you’re talking about generative ai doesn’t give you any fucking context clues? Who is arguing against machine learning?? Nobody! Who is fighting to get rid of disease modeling? Nobody!! These are fake arguments that only exist to distract from the very very limited potential of chatbots, and yes, generative ai is just chatbots.

Yeah, sure, it can produce text. That’s not my issue with your previous comment. The issue is you bring up “generative ai” and then list a bunch of machine learning applications that have nothing to do with chatbots.

Obviously it’s for gen ai. Why do ai boosters always conflate this!! You started this thread about “generative ai”, and then when questioned gave a bunch of non-llm use cases, followed by a quick edit and ‘oh yeah it can produce text’.

Every ai pusher does this. You ask why chatbots are useful and they basically accuse you of being anti-science, as if they believe talking to a chatbot should also be included as ‘doing science’. You are a consumer, not a researcher.

How do you employ ai non-greedily, pray tell?

You’ve provided no reason, yet again, for your claim. Am I being unreasonable? Is there no reason you can think of why I might doubt your sincerity?

Random assertions are not valid arguments. I’m not even saying you’re right or wrong, you are providing no value to the discussion.

This you? First comment in this thread?

I’m so glad we’ve had this rising moral grandstanding authortarianism on the left in the past 10 years.

I didn’t ask why you believed anticrypto is leftist, I solely asked of you were arguing in good faith, why you believed you were justified asserting things without evidence. I don’t really care about anything else you say until you prove to me you are a reasonable person. Everything else is just noise.

you will find it is the replies from others who frame things as a left-right binary.

You sure? Like, absolutely sure? Did you check?

All I asked was if you felt it was justified to assume everyone knows why you believe this is leftist. Do you consider yourself a reasonable person? That’s more important to me than anything else you said at the moment.

And I question if the point of it is truely about protecting people or defining in-groups and out-groups and promoting ideological conformism.

My point is, who cares if this is part of the community’s reasoning? All communities are defined by common beliefs.

its more telling that asking us to self reflect on what the contemporary left is evidently such a taboo.

Why do you feel like you can just drop that in without any explanation? Not everything falls into a left-right binary. Open discussions require both sides to be reasonable, you need to provide reasons for your claims, otherwise it’s just noise.

The OSI applies to software like forgejo, not services like codeberg. The term ‘open source’ does not imply a software uses an open license or follows any particular philosophy, it can be used by any project, with any license.

Nope! You just made that up! Open source is when the source is openly available. If you were thinking of the free software movement, you’re still wrong! I hope that’s helpful.

I don’t know if the word ‘censorship’ is the one I’d choose, but assuming codeberg is committing ‘censorship’, what’s the problem? Private organisations do that all the time. It’s only illegal for the government. Have you never had a wage job? Every job training I’ve been through included multiple types of self censorship. The difference between it and government censorship is there’s competition in the private market, you can just leave the job if you don’t want to put up with it.