• EnderMB@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    150
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    6 months ago

    All of big tech is really worried about this.

    • Apple is worried about its own science output, with many of their office heavily employing data scientists. A lot of people slate Siri, but Apple’s scientists put out a lot of solid research.
    • Amazon is plugging GenAI into practically everything to appease their execs, because it’s the only way to get funding. Moonshot ideas are dead, and all that remains is layoffs, PIP, and pumping AI into shit where it doesn’t belong to make shareholders happy. The innovation died, and AI replaced it.
    • Google has let AI divisions take over both search and big parts of ads. Both are reporting worse experiences for users, but don’t worry, any engineer worth anything was laid off and there are no opportunities in other divisions for you either. If there are, they probably got offshored…
    • Meta is struggling a lot less, probably because they were smart enough to lay off in one go, but they’re still plugging AI shite in places no one asked for it, with many divisions now severely down in headcount.

    If the AI boom is a dud, I can see many of these companies reducing their output further. If someone comes along and competes in their primary offering, there’s a real concern that they’ll lose ground in ways that were unthinkable mere years ago. Someone could legitimately challenge Google on search right now, and someone could build a cheap shop that doesn’t sell Chinese tat and uses local suppliers to compete with Amazon. Tech really shat the bed during the last economic downturn.

    • empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      51
      ·
      6 months ago

      Meta is struggling a lot less, probably because they were smart enough to lay off in one go,

      or more like their user experience was already so garbage, adding AI to it doesn’t make any noticeable change lol

      • yrmp@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        6 months ago

        I don’t use a single Meta product on purpose. I’m sure they scrape my data despite my best efforts to not be tracked online.

        I still unfortunately order things from Amazon for the convenience, use Windows for gaming and at work, and occasionally use Google search with heavy boolean search, custom search engines, and browser extensions for filtering out the garbage. I also still use Google Maps and I have an Android based tv where I occasionally watch SmartTube.

        Hell I even get Netflix included with my T-Mobile subscription. My wife watches that.

        And for now, I have an iPhone SE until it dies and I make the switch to a Google phone or something.

        Typing this out makes me wonder what I’m waiting for to find alternatives for this FAANG garbage, but I have no idea how Facebook still exists.

        • vxx@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          I still unfortunately order things from Amazon for the convenience

          It turned out that it’s incredible easy to order as guest at other sides

          • yrmp@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            6 months ago

            Yes but I don’t want to type my billing details every time I need some thing. I don’t want to wait 6 weeks. I don’t know if other sites are reputable. I don’t want to pay shipping. I like being able to wishlist stuff or store stuff in my cart for later and read lots of reviews on products (I’m aware many are fake).

            There’s also the fact that nearly every website runs on AWS, so even if I boycott Amazon (I’m sure they’ll miss my $100 a month in purchases), I’m still providing them money by visiting the sites that are hosted on AWS. Pretty hard to completely avoid them in this day and age.

    • normanwall@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      39
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Google has let AI divisions take over both search

      I fucking bing’d something the other day to get a better search result. What the fuck google.

      • Subverb@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        6 months ago

        Try Kagi. Paid search engines are the future in order to extract yourself from the enshittification of “free” search engines.

    • justaderp@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Monopolies don’t care about the user experience, only profit. The AI doesnt understand the former, only the latter. The continued degredation of the user experience is a likely indicator of an increase in revenue as function of successful application of AI.

      • Thurstylark@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        6 months ago

        The AI doesnt understand the former, only the latter.

        Do you possibly mean “The AI evangelists” or something similar?

        Like, I could totally understand it in the “software will also include the biases of those who wrote it” kind of way (a la Amazon’s failed attempt at automating job candidate search). If the only incentive you’re given as a programmer is “make it make money”, then yeah, your AI is going to bias towards that end.

        Just couldn’t tell on first reading

        • justaderp@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          6 months ago

          I’m not actually asking for good faith answers to these questions. Asking seems the best way to illustrate the concept.

          Does the programmer fully control the extents of human meaning as the computation progresses, or is the value in leveraging ignorance of what the software will choose?

          Shall we replace our judges with an AI?

          Does the software understand the human meaning in what it does?

          The problem with the majority of the AI projects I’ve seen (in rejecting many offers) is that the stakeholders believe they’ve significantly more influence over the human meaning of the results than exists in the quality and nature of the data they’ve access to. A scope of data limits a resultant scope of information, which limits a scope of meaning. Stakeholders want to break the rules with “AI voodoo”. Then, someone comes along and sells the suckers their snake oil.

      • umbrella@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        its a function of paying their employees less for more work relatively speaking and extracting more profit from consumers through ads and enshitification in general

      • brianorca@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        6 months ago

        But that’s also a path for them to no longer be a monopoly, if the right competitor makes the right moves.

        • justaderp@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          We’re living in a late stage capitalistic hellhole and you’re advocating faith in the free market.

          What. The. Fuck.

          • brianorca@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            I’m saying it’s happened before. AOL. Palm. Yahoo. Blackberry. A company with an effective monopoly gets complacent and fails to serve their users. They get replaced.

    • greenskye@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      I’m not sure there could be any sort of legitimate threat to them, but I could definitely see a Netflix situation playing out. That is a popular upstart temporarily seems poised to take over, but then suffers from extreme levels of interference from bigger players who artificially hold the upstart down while they desperately catch up and then ultimately come at least equal while the Netflix equivalent is mostly a shell of what it could’ve been.

      Never underestimate how much buckets and buckets of cash reserves can overcome even incredibly out of touch laziness when it comes to competing with any start ups. Apple in particular could probably afford to let competitors get a decade ahead and still be able to come back based on the ridiculous amount of cash they have to float their business along with.

      • Regrettable_incident@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        6 months ago

        Yeah competition won’t work in a market where some competitors have such massive amounts of wealth. This is a failure of unrestrained capitalism and it’s bad for consumers ultimately.

      • MataVatnik@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        AI did boom, but people don’t realize the peak happened a year ago. Now all we have is latecomers with FOMO. It’s gonna be all incremental gains from here on.

        • raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          6 months ago

          AI did boom, but people don’t realize the peak happened a year ago.

          A simple control algorithm “if temperature > LIMIT turnOffHeater” is AI, albeit an incredibly limited one.

          LLMs are not AI. Please don’t parrot marketing bullshit.

          The former has an intrinsic understanding about a relationship based in reality, the latter has nothing of the likes.

          • MataVatnik@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            I can see where you’re getting at, LLM don’t necessarily solve a problem, they just mímic patterns in data.

            • raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              6 months ago

              That is indeed exactly my point. LLMs are just a language-tailored expression of deep-learning, which can be incredibly useful, but should never be confused for any kind of intelligence (i.e. logical conclusions).

              I appreciate that you see my point and admit that it makes some sense :)

              Example where I think pattern recognition by deep learning can be extremely useful:

              • recheck medical imaging data of patients that have already been screened by a doctor, to flag some data for a re-check by a second doctor. This could improve chances of e.g. early cancer detection for patients, without a real risk of a false detection, because again, a real doctor will look at the flagged results in detail before even alarming a patient to a potential diagnosis
              • pre-filter large amounts of data for potential matches -> e.g. exoplanet search by certain patterns (planet hunters lets humans do this as crowdsourcing)

              But what I am afraid is happening for people who do not see why a very simple algorithm is already AI, but consider LLMs AI, is that they mentally decide to call AI what seems “AGI” / “human-like”. They mistake the patterns of LLMs for a conscious being and that is incredibly dangerous in terms of trusting the answers given by LLMs.

              Why do I think they subconsciously imply (self-)awareness / conscience? Because to not consider as (very limited) AI a control mechanism like a simple room thermostat, is viewing it as “too simple” to be AI - which means that a person with such a view makes a qualitative distinction between control laws and “AI”, where a quantitative distinction between “simple AI” and “advanced AI” would be appropriate.

              And such a qualitative distinction that elevates a complex word guessing machine to “intelligence”, that can only be made by people who actually believe there’s understanding behind those word predictions.

              That’s my take on this.

    • cm0002@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      6 months ago

      Someone could legitimately challenge Google on search right now

      Not really, unfortunately, because of the sheer mass of the internet the infrastructure to just support the index of it requires massive funding. Even other giants like MS with Bing struggled with this. Short of a radical new way to run a search engine without a massive index, I just don’t see it happening.

      • greenskye@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        6 months ago

        It’s kind of curious to me about search because honestly my Internet world has only grown smaller and smaller. Where I used to use Google to find new websites, I feel like most of my searches on Google are now to search a handful of sites I already know. Ironically if Reddit had a better search function, a lot of my Google usage would fall off as I’d just go directly there, as it’s still the best place I’ve found for troubleshooting support and real reviews of lots of products. A competitor to Google wouldn’t really need to index the entire web for most people, but rather a relatively small number of website super giants like Amazon, Reddit, Wikipedia, etc.