1090
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 31 May 2026
1090 points (98.1% liked)
Fuck AI
8729 readers
2000 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.
AI, in this case, refers to LLMs, GPT technology, and anything listed as "AI" meant to increase market valuations.
Rules:
- Relevant posts only.
- No bigotry.
- No misinformation.
- No NSFW/NSFL content without being labeled NSFW or being in an appropriately-labeled spoiler tag.
- This isn't a place to talk about the cons and (supposed) pros of AI for different use cases. This is /c/fuck_ai .
- Especially no AI advocacy.
- No AI-generated content. If you want to post examples of AI failing hillariously, there are other communities for that like !ArtificialIgnorance@lemmy.ca .
- Venting is part of the purpose of this community, but don't aim frustration or accusations at other users.
- These rules are a living document that may change in the future.
You can help the mod team by making your reports detailed.
Effective reports:
- "The third image is a well-known anti-semitic trope"
- "Claiming that 'agentic AI' can outperform humans at all jobs is misinformation"
Less effective reports:
- "Breaks rules"
- "Misinformation"
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
God both sides are toxic AF and here I am simply want to know if correlation is causation.
It is. Reading thus lemmy threads gives commits or links to other commenters. My fav is this one https://neuromatch.social/@jonny/116666900898570791
That's a great post, that well displays the issues with AI tests! For my own personal curiosity I looked at the testing rewrite of rsync, specifically the chgrp_test because it was the smallest test I quickly found. If you look at the original shell script, all it does is call chgrp and then fail if it doesn't work. In the Python rewrite on the other hand the LLM calls chown to change the group and only if that fails, it tests chgrp. So if for some reason chown works but chgrp would fail, the original shell script would easily catch that (cause why do you test for chown anyways) while the Python rewrite doesn't even call chgrp in case chown works.
Even though, this might not be as much of a problem in practice, I think it illustrates that the AI tends to write tests where it already anticipates and tries to fix potential issues, which absolutely goes against the use of tests!
LLMs just generate "statistically probable" text, all it's doing is generating text that looks like how you'd write tests, they may or may not actually test anything.
dont get tricked into thinking an LLM can encode "anticipation of a potential issue"
Lol this is hilarious! I want to see the prompt they used cause my god they didn't think it through
I'm honestly not seeing two sides being shitty. I feel like I see people being shitty towards the developer and people being opposed to that.