me_irl
2d 16h ago by lemmy.today/u/sanitation in me_irl from lemmy.today
I automatically block any user that responds to another user's question with "I asked AI and this is what it said..."
-
If I wanted an AI answer, I would have asked the AI myself; I don't need your dumb ass acting like a middle man.
-
It's even worse than saying "just Google it."
I've had multiple people do this to me at work. I know how to ask AI a question motherfucker. If I wanted its answer I wouldn't be asking you.
Work has got rotten with this. Department silos have become individual silos, as people only dare to show they might not know something when "speaking" with the corporate spyware every office worker has suddenly been mandated to use
Right? I'm on the internet, the greatest social web ever created, because I want to talk to PEOPLE.
I think the users that use ai as a crutch are lijely the ones that get told to google it, not tge ones saying it. Iys those that dont want to learn that use ai and dont research. Googling something requires (required?) a curiousity. A chatbot just presents factual seeming data to those who font question it.
Do you just not read what you type at all? And even then, how do you make that many errors?
It takes great practice. And a dodgy touchscreen. And bad preductive text.
Check out FUTO keyboard
Thanks. I will.
Blocking people is such a bitch ass small mind move. It's sticking your fingers in your ears going LALALALALALA and pretending you're making a point.
"I asked Grook/Alexa/ChatGPT and it said..."
"I asked my cat and it said .."
I mean, yeah, even my orange cat has more working neurons that any LLM, but me, ofc.
Came across a suggestion the other day, using the Microsoft Office swear word filter, replace "AI" with "my cat".
Now I can't unsee it..
According to my cat the answer to that question is ..
Here's some code written by my cat.
AI told me you're bluffing.
I've seen more and more instances of somebody saying they "Googled it" but what they really did is read Google's AI overview. That's not the same.
Watching in rising horror as I ask my friend a question and he "looks it up" using Google... Then proceeds to just read off the generated slop at the top of the web results without even going to, like, the Wikipedia article that is right there.
I generally tell the other person the source of my informations/ideas/suggestion, so when I say "According to AI" IRL it is to let the other person know that this suggestion has not been verified
I would rather you just told me, "I don't know."
The main problem is if I'm going through the trouble of asking a question, I want your thoughts or expertise on it. If I wanted the robot that's wrong half thr time to give me an answer I'd have asked it.
In places like work its even worse. I'll ask a question only for a junior who has no experience in the thing to answer "well Claude says this-" thanks. You just wasted tokens and gave me info that you don't know anything about so you can't verify the legitimacy of it, and now when people search this problem in the work chat in the future they might take your unverified information as gospel.
Its a waste of everyone's time and money to give subpar unverified information
the alternative to people saying "according to AI: XYZ", is that they say "XYZ" and state it as a fact.
I’ll ask a question only for a junior who has no experience in the thing to answer “well Claude says this-” thanks.
yes. i want to know which tools my juniors use so i can help them to become better at their job.
Its a waste of everyone’s time and money to give subpar unverified information
when you are brainstorming approaches, then "subpar unverified information" is exactly what you want.
the alternative to people saying “according to AI: XYZ”, is that they say “XYZ” and state it as a fact.
That's not the only alternative. They could also verify, or at least contextualise, what they read. Even if you're using a chatbot, you can get it to give you some references.
The problem is the unearned confidence in the answer they know nothing about. Is them saying "I asked the ai and it said..." better than them asking the ai and not prefacing it? Yes. But the problem is asking the AI and then answering the question in the first place.
If you don't know, say I don't know, don't regurgitate information feom thr AI. We all have access to the same tools, there is no reason to use AI to answer the question I asked you, because if I wanted what AI had to say I'd have asked it myself.
The problem is the unearned confidence in the answer they know nothing about
that is a different problem, which i agree is significant.
there is no reason to use AI to answer the question I asked you
if you ask me "what is your view on X" than I will not tell you what AI said. If you ask "Is there something we haven't considered about X", then I could answer something like "according to AI X has property Y, which afaik we have not considered ".
This still does not fix the problem of "I asked you because I wanted your input, if I wanted to ask the chatbot I would have". The core issue.
I generated some random text and it said...
I trust Terry's god communicator more. I recall someone pointing out that it once said "China", "virus", "Putin" and "war" in one session.
the corporate minder with built-in backdoors for ad surveillance extruded the following...
This should be discouraged by all means necessary. When it happens to me I call them out immediately.
There should be a new emoji for rejecting slop. Suggestions?
No please
In cybersecurity its either "how do we protect against AI?" or "Can we run the new Fable 5 when it's available to check for vulnerabilities?"
It's very telling how lazy a lot of managers are that they don't even take the time to understand how AI is even used, their response is just "Do an AI"
Worked at a place where they put the customer’s single PowerPoint slide with maybe 10 bullets describing vague requirements for a prototype solar powered airplane into Claude and asked for a project plan and deliverable schedule.
DAMN. I want to post this sssssooo baaaaaadddd in my Fluxer server......... jaflsajfsajfdlk
AI told me to ask how I should tell if you've lost it?
AI told me a lot of people feel like that.
Only doing that quote if I couldnt care less about researching a proper source for a one time argument.
If the argument has an almost zero meaning and it's just for the sake of being able to say "Told you so", I will not do it.
For actual facts I may use it to find a source. But I will refuse to quote it or take it as gospel.
My initial reaction: "Al(ex) sounds like a know-it-all, but I really need more context here."
I use it as "take it with a grain of salt, I'm not putting any weight on this".