• goosehorse@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    23 days ago

    Don’t these fart-huffing jackasses understand that I actually need to read my e-mails to plan physical meetings with other flesh-based entities?

    It’s difficult for me to fathom how someone could risk their work getting fucked up by non-deterministic software.

    To me, it’s not worth the risk or the hassle to set up and babysit a piece of software that might get shit wrong when I can just do it correctly in the first place.

    • a9249@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      23 days ago

      I’m the other fence. My daily reporting has 12-15 documents output, that I then previously had to spend 3-5 hours moving this item over to this form, and that item over to that form, and management wants everything to be kept locked PDF so no excel macros can be used… upload everything to claude, let it run. Sure… sure, itll make errors here and there… but no one actually checks what these documents pop out… only that they’re there. And that alone, has cut my workload by half. So, thanks AI for giving me my time back, and thanks boomer bosses, for not knowing how to do basic computer tasks badly enough they will never figure it out!

      • HerbGrower@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        22 days ago

        Using AI to complete bullshit work tasks that shouldn’t exist in the first place. Yep, I know that feeling very well.

        Had loads in my last job. I could spend a few hours and struggle to fill in a few sentences for this bullshit form HR keep sending us, or I could ask ChatGPT to write the most obviously generic corpospeak crap that for some reason people like and are even impressed when I say that I used AI for it. Am I the only one that feels like it shows that the task is pointless?

  • kescusay@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    25 days ago

    What we want is software that behaves predictably. Since LLMs don’t do that, we don’t want them or their “agents.”

    For fuck’s sake.

    • Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      25 days ago

      To be clear, “normal” people are using LLMs like crazy. This I believe is specifically talking about is installed local agents. Boomers and non tech industry suits are using LLMs left and right and won’t shut up about them.

    • Franconian_Nomad@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      25 days ago

      So you’re decided not to use a useful tool, because you don’t like it. Gotcha.

      I once thought the fediverse was full of cool, techsavy people. Turned out it’s full of old people yelling at clouds.

      • SorryQuick@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        24 days ago

        Sir this is lemmy. Most people here just follow whatever the echo chamber tells them to. Thinking or referencing reality is typically not advised.

      • Zedd_Prophecy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        25 days ago

        I’ve had Gemini downright lie or completely fuck up before and it’s not a rare occurrence. That means you have to verify everything anyway and hell at that point maybe you should have just looked it up yourself.

        • Franconian_Nomad@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          24 days ago

          First of: When? Few months make a huge difference. Development happens fast.

          Second: Gemini is not the top of the line. You could do worse - if you use the fucking LLMs from meta.

            • Franconian_Nomad@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              22 days ago

              That doesn’t make any sense.:

              „This sub-par product of an evil mega corporation that uses their market power to shove this product down everyone’s throat is all I’m willing to tolerate.“

              As bad as Antrophic and openAI are, their product is better and they don’t embed it into phones and search engines. (Not saying they wouldnt‘t if they have the chance, but they haven’t)

              • Zedd_Prophecy@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                21 days ago

                It makes sense. I’m not spending a dime… I’m not signing up and giving my credentials out to any other AI … I already have Google . Gemini is good enough for the things I look up monus occasionally being dead wrong which all of them can do. I don’t make stupid memes or videos.

                • Franconian_Nomad@feddit.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  21 days ago

                  Yeah okay. I understand the monetary angle.

                  However I also have never spent a dime on AI, and I don’t use Gemini. I run Qwen3.6 on my graphics card, or use opencodes free tier. Deepseek-v4- flash is pretty good.

                  I’ve read a comment recently that Googles local Gemma models hallucinate less than Gemini, but I don’t know if that’s true, since I hardly use Gemma and Gemini not at all.

                  I recommend downloading some local models and a harness like pi or opencode if you want to play around an have the hardware for it.

      • phutatorius@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        25 days ago

        I like Northern Ireland, despite its problems, but I’ve never considered it an alternative to AI. Interesting insight there.

        • AmyAye@nord.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          24 days ago

          Its pretty good at giving correct answers but god its slow and expensive. You gotta print and post like 2 million letters asking your question, wait for the concensus to be achived, wait for the comittee to conbein and compile the answer, then wait for the answer to come back.

          They could at least streamline it a bit, maybe call instead of mailing the answer, and save a bit on the post by just having a dedicated radio signal that blasts the question to the entire population instead of having to send everyone a letter.

  • Em Adespoton@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    25 days ago

    I have agents force fed to me at work. I’ve already got my own honed workflows I’ve refined over the years; now, Outlook and Teams and Various agentic frameworks are spamming me with summaries of stuff I either already know or don’t need to know… except they still get it wrong constantly, so I can’t trust what they think I should prioritize (usually it’s work I’ve already assigned to others).

    Claude Code agents are decent, but they need to create discrete work objects that can be properly reviewed, so act like junior coders.

    The main issue I have with most agents today is that they try to replace MY work, making it more complicated and time consuming, instead of completing the work I can’t bother to do myself. And in order to do those things effectively, I have to loosen my privacy and security models to the point where they effectively don’t exist. Which I’d never do for another human, so why should I do it for an agent that’s more likely to catastrophically screw things up at record speed?

    • wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      24 days ago

      Good job putting to words one of the core issues I’ve had with using LLM chat for work. Stop trying to design an entire fucking system or solution and just answer the damn question I actually asked, by using natural language to search documentation and existing implementations.

      I would tell it to only answer exactly what I asked, but sometimes I do get value from it “exploring” on occasion. It’s just so much damn worse with it than my newest junior co-worker who is known on our team for getting hours deep into tangential rabbit holes before coming up for air and asking seemingly nonsequiteur questions.

      • joe@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        24 days ago

        Back when search engines were becoming a thing, people would search more or less using natural language, e.g., “I want to see cat pictures and also cute kittens.” but early search engines performed poorly with that kind of query; it was much better to just type keywords, e.g. “cat kitten pictures”. Exacerbating the situation was the fact that search engines weren’t very good at the time, even if you used carefully considered keywords.

        It might seem silly now, but using a search engine effectively was a skill people had to learn, and a skill not everyone had.

        Using chatbots is the same thing, I think. They’re not super reliable to begin with, and on top of that, I don’t think people understand the importance of a well crafted prompt. The combination can make using them very frustrating.

        • sem@piefed.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          21 days ago

          I read somewhere that teaching people about how LLMs work is way better at protecting them from the harms of LLMs than trying to convince them not to use them.

          This would include prompt engineering i guess! Which to be fair i do not know about.

          The video makes fun of it by having the vibe coder put "… or you go to jail " at the end of every prompt. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JeNS1ZNHQs8

  • AnticitizenOne@leminal.space
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    24 days ago

    Fundamentally, they cost way, way too much to run. LLMs are useful tools (I use them a bit for data analysis and coding help) and the people who use them for that kind of thing might pay the full cost in some form (not as individuals but their companies might). But they’re trying to push them into everything and people who can’t think for themselves and want them to help them write emails and such are not going to foot the bill. Not even close.

    I think they’ve realised that forcing universal adoption is the only way that this could work, to get everyone hooked on it then jack up the prices. But regular consumers will never, ever be the ones paying the enormous costs of LLMs. Even companies will start to realise that there is no point paying huge amounts just for everyone to be able to outsource writing emails and basic tasks to LLMs. And short of any huge breakthrough, they are incapable of doing most jobs.

    • Jarix@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      24 days ago

      It’s not difficult to understand. This whole AI bubble is just a push to get enough people, a critical mass, over a threshold that they start paying for the usage. The Bubble was waiting for the money to run out which is what built the bubble. The money is running out and the subscriptions are ready for purchase.