276
GrapheneOS defends use of AI for coding
(grapheneos.social)
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 10 Sep 2026
276 points (90.6% liked)
Technology
88037 readers
3756 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- 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.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
I always wonder where this sentiment comes from. Whether or not AI is going anywhere is still very much up in the air
Yeah, lots of new tech that vanished because it sucked, wasn't profitable, destroyed the environment, etc.
You cannot put the evils back into Pandora's Box when it was already open.
Even if these companies sink, individuals can still use their own hardware for AI. Ai is here to stay whether we like it or not.
So where are all the 3D TVs? Where's the Nintendo Virtual Boy? Betamax? Google Wave? Google+? NFTs?
Oh not transformational enough?
Ok then how long did it take electric vehicles to come back after The fossil fuel industry killed them in like 1920?
Oh here's a good one: thalidomide. That one went away for good.
How about the hole in the ozone layer?
Sorry, AI is only a foregone conclusion because apparently everyone's had their consent beautifully manufactured to an extreme degree.
Sure you can. Because in this case Pandora’s box is something which exists solely through a sustained, inconceivable amount of money being continuously funneled into it without any guaranteed long term benefit to the people who do so. It’s a technology which isn’t sold as a product as it exists in its current form, but a theoretical future form.
If the bottom were to fall out from under it tomorrow, it couldn’t even continue to exist as it is now, it would disappear entirely as there would be no financial incentive to keep it running. Individuals could still run what we have now offline, but its value and usefulness would degrade rapidly as time went on, because it relies on mass-scale power consumption and data theft to remain up to date, much less improve.
stop. calling. slop. ai. It's a shitty subcategory of it. Just like actual dog poo is a subcategory of organic chemical compounds.
It exclusively comes from either snake oil vendors or people who are less smart than they think they are. Where the former are typically part of the latter group.
At the very least, you'd have to convince both the US and China to stomp it out. And then there are other countries that would be willing to pick up the slack.
AI is not something self sustaining enough to necessarily require stomping out, at least that we know of at this point. Right now AI’s future relies on its operators continuing to convince people of a theoretical future scenario.
GOS is not part of a theoretical future.
It's not going anywhere because it's already been here for a very long time, you just didn't know about it
What people call "AI" is just Machine Learning.
Chatbots, OCR, Text-to-Speech, Speech-to-Text, Computer Vision, Web Search, Spam filtering or Fraud detection, Personalized ADs, even your phone's camera processing algorithm.
It's all Machine Learning, but now under new and fancy "AI" name. And it's been here for decades.
The reason it blew up this much only now is because people realized that the more data you feed into it, the better the output becomes. And so they started exploring it more, to the extent of causing valid ethical concerns.
Machine learning isn’t going anywhere. But it’s clear from the context here what we’re referring to when we say AI in this conversation.
As someone who despises the current slop hype with a passion, you're correct on this. But only when you exclude LLMs. Because they are garbage with a net negative for mankind. Machine learning as a field however has very useful applications. Typically such that complement human assessment of data, e.g. re-viewing radiology images to flag potentially anomalous images for a second doctor to look at - not in place of the first doctor.
Finally, someone gets it!
Instead of going away, the AI will transform. It's sort of in a bubble state rn. Once it pops, the fields where it's useful will keep on using it, whilst those applications that have no real grounds for existing will either have their plugs pulled or resources cut.
Apparently, not to me. Explain.
Edit: Downvoting a person for asking clarification? Shame on you lot.
Here's a starting-point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_language_model
Pointing to a wiki page instead of actually explaining stuff isn't going to change my mind.
Now, if you're talking specifically about LLMs, however (which you could've just said so, ffs). I think their scope of application and resources wasted on them will be significantly reduced. Look at what happened to blockchains and NFT. Basically, I expect the same to happen here.
Nobody is trying to change your mind. You’re just immune to context clues lol
So, instead of helping me out when I ask, you choose shaming?
If you just wanted to bitch about AI instead of having a proper conversation, you could've just said so.
The conversation we’re having doesn’t involve the place of irrelevance you’re trying to pull it to.
It’s not bitching about AI, it’s a conversation that’s different from the one that you’re trying to have.
I’m not trying to shame you, I’m just letting you know that the weird semantic sidebar you’re trying to start is irrelevant to what’s being discussed. We don’t have to stop what we’re doing and explain this to you just because you’re demanding it.
Decided to check your comment history. You DO just want to bitch about stuff. It seems you have a problem with everybody's opinion.
And instead of actually explaining yourself, what do you do? "It's not me, it's you". Every. Single. Time.
Dude, that's miserable.
Have a nice day. Like, genuinely, go have a day off with your loved ones or smth.
Lmao what is wrong with you. Touch some grass fella.
Just because we’re both on this website doesn’t mean I have to engage with you at your whim. Another user tried to help you out and you blew him off too. If anybody just wants to complain here it’s you.
Then why do you keep engaging with me after I've said my piece?
If you're talking about the link guy, that's not helping. Usually, people do that just to be a smart ass, especially on tech forums with their "go read the manual." Yikes to those guys. Besides, they weren't "blown off" as you said, there was also proper response if you read the comment once more.
The other people who were responding to me were actually quite reasonable, it's mainly you I have had issues with.
If you got what you needed from them then why are you still bugging me lol
And that's bullshit. The slop machines have already peaked. More input will not improve the results.
Not compared to models from 00s or 10s...
What's with the reading comprehension, people? I was talking about pre-AI boom vs. now, not now vs. 1-2 years ago, c'mon.
LLMs use a new way of data processing (focused on language rules) which is what brought the boost. Not more training data. More training data is needed for an LLM to reach "maturity" but it also increases cost due to resource usage. And current LLMs have already absorbed basically all of the internet and most books, and since the internet is now full of slop, more unpoisoned training data does not exist. That's why more does not help anymore.
Touché