Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

highplainsdem

(61,057 posts)
27. No, the problem using genAI is with genAI and its inherent flaws. Anyone who's ever used genAI should
Mon Feb 16, 2026, 09:16 AM
14 hrs ago

be aware that the exact same prompt can get different answers, often wildly different answers. Every image generator that offers multiple options as results given just one prompt proves that.

And text generators can do the same thing, but are rarely set to do so because multiple varying text responses make it painfully obvious (painful for AI peddlers) that genAI has no real awareness of what is correct. And what can be excused as "creative" when there are very different images offered at once can't be excused away when it's text, no matter how hard the AI companies have tried to market their flawed tech's hallucinations as "creative" responses.

I would argue the biggest problem is the fuckhead AI companies paying off the pols so they can rush to market before there's ANY protective standards for humanity.


The first gigantic problem was the worldwide theft of intellectual property.

The second gigantic problem was release of tech they knew could and would be widely used for cheating and criminal fraud.

The third was releasing AI that hallucinated and still sounded convincing.

The fourth was releasing chatbots designed to become addictive.

I don't consider badly flawed tech that can be used for fraud amazing.

And there was a paragraph in your previous message that I should have responded to:

AI doing coding is 100% here to stay, so discussing the non-perfection in using AI to do it is a bit pointless at this juncture. There's probably nothing it's better at doing, and it relies on publicly available/non-copyrighted documents to do that work, so it's also among the more morally acceptable things to use it for.


"Publicly available" is not the same thing as "non-copyrighted" even though AI robber barons would love people to believe they are the same.

AI models that code also have legal problems.

https://www.bloomberglaw.com/external/document/X4H9CFB4000000/copyrights-professional-perspective-ip-issues-with-ai-code-gener

Recommendations

1 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Thx to you & Goonch SheltieLover Friday #1
Lol for fun I asked an AI the reason for the discrepancy and gave it the passage from your post AZJonnie Friday #2
Not sure what you mean. It quoted one of my replies in that Science Fiction thread, or it quoted highplainsdem Friday #4
I mean it literally sourced from this very thread AZJonnie Friday #7
Claude is clueless. There is an actual story. I posted links about it in the earlier thread I linked to. There highplainsdem Friday #9
It's not surprising that it got confused, this entire discussion is extremely circular AZJonnie Friday #13
I would've expected any bot to at least follow the links in both threads, which would have shown that highplainsdem Friday #15
Claude would have seen this bit, in Goonch's follow-up, which said this: AZJonnie Friday #17
Interesting seeing you try to defend Claude's inane answer, when this thread links to the older thread highplainsdem Yesterday #19
I guess I am, given you don't know what the actual prompt was, yet are arbitrarily coming up with a strawman AZJonnie Yesterday #20
If there was anything close to intelligence in Claude, the highplainsdem Yesterday #21
Why must you insist it's a delusional tangent AZJonnie Yesterday #22
No, the problem using genAI is with genAI and its inherent flaws. Anyone who's ever used genAI should highplainsdem 14 hrs ago #27
And, The Chatbot Is Still Wrong ProfessorGAC Friday #3
+1. It's patent nonsense dalton99a Friday #5
I don't know about that one, Professor :) AZJonnie Friday #8
I'm Going To Say No ProfessorGAC Friday #11
Obviously I know I don't know nearly as much on this topic as you do, so I generally defer, Sir :) AZJonnie Friday #14
Pretty Much ProfessorGAC Friday #16
Can you name a movie in which one person occupied two places at the same time? Orrex 13 hrs ago #29
BTTF Is A Prime Example, Yes ProfessorGAC 11 hrs ago #33
Right, but that's not the same Marty in two places at once Orrex 10 hrs ago #34
Not Getting You ProfessorGAC 10 hrs ago #35
I think we're differing on what qualifies as the "same" person Orrex 10 hrs ago #37
Oh wait. I just caught your bit about "lack of matter available" Orrex 9 hrs ago #38
These tools don't just fabricate fiction. They fabricate citations in law and science pieces. RockRaven Friday #6
Yes. I mentioned that in the earlier thread I linked to. I've posted lots of warnings here over the last few years highplainsdem Friday #10
+1. AI is essentially a smooth-talking buzzword-spewing bullshitter with an unlimited capacity for plagiarism dalton99a Friday #12
Exactly. highplainsdem Yesterday #18
When ChatGPT became popular, people said AI systems really need to provide sources. Renew Deal Yesterday #24
Good catch Renew Deal Yesterday #23
Thanks - but I wouldn't have caught it if I hadn't already looked at a number of websites about the story so highplainsdem 14 hrs ago #25
Yikes. So how do we combat this? It's only going to get worse. Scrivener7 14 hrs ago #26
Yeah, it's getting scary. I posted something I didn't know was AI. I took it down as soon as mucifer 14 hrs ago #28
It's really bad in the political commentary video space Renew Deal 12 hrs ago #31
I suspect AI systems will be like fish farms. cachukis 12 hrs ago #30
I miss the old Google. Hell, I miss the old Alta Vista. haele 12 hrs ago #32
Anyone can make up a quote. GoCubsGo 10 hrs ago #36
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»You've probably heard tha...»Reply #27