ok god.

So, this is a shitpost right?

Not Europe but I can relate.

OK, Mr. Big Brain Misuse-of-Terms. no point talking to someone who already thinks they know everything. Enjoy the echo chamber, lol.

Yeah, go cry about it. People use AI to help themselves while you’re just being technophobic, shouting ‘AI is bad’ without even saying which AI you mean. And you’re doing it on Lemmy, a tiny techno-bubble. Lmao.

… almost everyone knows what we’re talking about, so the way we’re using language is fine.

You said it — almost. Not everyone knows or understands, so wouldn’t it be better to use the correct term instead of still using the wrong one? You’re saying almost because we’re on Lemmy, and yes, most Fediverse software users are techies. I have friends who talk about “AI,” I edited this to lessen confusion to the second paragraph. For more specific, they were talking that ‘AI is going to take our job, it can do copywriting for me’ but when I ask further, they’re actually talking about LLMs — which is not the same thing. And you yourself know it’s wrong, since you work in the related field. When I hear that, I just tell them, “It’s LLM, and LLMs are bla bla bla.” Whether they nod or not is on them, but at least they’ve been told the correct thing.

I accept being called a language prescriptivist in this case, because we’re here on Lemmy, most people are techies or nerds, and we’re discussing technology. In everyday conversation I’m not pedantic, but in technical contexts, precision matters.

This isn’t ‘whataboutism.’ I’m not opposing the substance of what’s being said, I’m pointing out how it’s being said. If we already know the correct term, why not use it? That’s not gatekeeping — that’s making the discussion clearer for everyone. As already being said on my previous comment, as an activist, that’s also your role being an educator. Without education, activism turns into noise.

I think this is how it should end. I agree with the substance of what’s being said, and you’ve already acknowledged my earlier point about where LLMs fit within the AI field. Since saying “AI is bad” as activism should also involve educating people with the correct term, I see this as a technical context rather than a public one. I respect your view since you’ve provided argumentation. Thanks.

If I stubbornly refuse to use the common terms and instead only use the technical terms …

That’s where your role takes part as someone who knows the correct term. I myself often teach my close ones about tech and its terms in my field. I don’t want to normalize using wrong terms in a technical discussion. It’s just depending on us to teach what’s right or just being comfortable what is already wrong and doing nothing about it. Activists are educators as much as they are advocates.

See I get the point of people hating what they call ‘AI’ here, I totally get it but I can’t see people using wrong terms since I know the correct one. The big corpos already misuse the term saying everything they made AI without specifying what kind of AI it is and people here that I assume techie also went to the wrong path (so you guys sounds the same as those evils, and u fell on the marketing). It’s not about whataboutism — it’s fixing what people always normalize using wrong terms when talking about technical stuff. I don’t care if you still don’t get it tho, I do what I can for saying the truth. And I don’t think you do know what ‘whataboutism’ really is.

As a non-English main, Deepl is useful for my locals (and for me). It’s just how it’s implemented. Still being open-minded, yeah, the extensive resource usage is bad for the earth tho, wishing there would be optimization.

I completely agree. Using AI to refer specifically to LLMs does reflect the influence of marketing from companies that may not fully represent the broader field of artificial intelligence. Sounds ironic to those who oppose LLM usage might end up sounding like the very bad actors they criticize if they also use the same misleading terms.

No hope commenting like this, just get ready getting downvoted with no reason. People use wrong terms and normalize it.

Yeah I read from that Wiki page — also from intelligence etymology and I totally get comments like yours. However saying LLMs are not AI and other kind of stuff are not AI can’t be accepted and often can lead to misunderstanding to non-techies. On the same Wiki page, there’s also mentioning about “Artificial”, since it’s artifical e.g. not created by nature and not having complex system like us humans, then LLMs can still be categorized as AI. Of course it will still have flaws tho. I’m here not to stand with LLMs but rather just want to tell people that terms misusage that I see oftentimes misleading and can spread misinformation. Let alone those big techs saying AI this and AI that whilst it’s just a subset of AI like LLMs, I just don’t want people here also falling in the same hole like those big techs that are using wrong terms in technology.

Define “intelligence”

On shrooms i would half expect someone to gain the realization that they don’t want to drive at all …

Well, it’s mixed with coke tho

Yes LLMs are AI, who don’t agree with this is stupid, sorry. But saying AI means LLM is wrong. Kindly take a look on my reason here why I always against to language misusage https://infosec.pub/comment/17417999. You English speakers sometimes make things harder to understand by misusing terms like ‘literally’ or using ‘AI’ to mean only LLMs. Language is meant to clarify, not confuse, and this shift in meaning can lead to misunderstandings, especially when talking about technical concepts.

Just to clarify, do you personally agree that LLMs are a subset of AI, with AI being the broader category that includes other technologies beyond LLMs?

I come from a technical background and have worked in AI to help people and small businesses whether it’s for farming, business decisions, and more. I can’t agree with the view that AI is inherently bad; it’s a valuable tool for many. What’s causing confusion is that ‘AI’ is often used to mean LLMs, which is inaccurate from a technical perspective. My goal is simply to encourage precise language use to avoid misunderstandings. People often misuse words in ways that stray far from their original etymology. For example, in Indonesia, we use the word ‘literally’ as it’s meant — in a literal sense, not figuratively, as it’s often misused in English nowadays. The word ‘literally’ in Indonesian would be translated as ‘secara harfiah,’ and when used, it means exactly as stated. Just like ‘literally,’ words should stay connected to their roots, whether Latin, Greek, or otherwise, as their original meanings give them their true value and purpose.

It’s partially correct but AI don’t always mean it’s LLM. Etymology is important here. Don’t normalize illiteracy.

IDK LMAO, that’s what I really hate about Reddit/Lemmy, the voting system. People downvote but don’t tell where I’m wrong in their opinion. I mean, at least argue — say out loud your (supposedly harmless) opinion. I even added a disclaimer there that I don’t promote LLM and such stuff. I don’t really care either, I stand with correctness and do what I can to correct what is wrong. I totally agree with @sentient_loom@sh.itjust.works tho.

In this particular case people are just ignorant as to how these new technologies function for example they continue to call them AI when they’re not AI they’re llms

You’re my people 👏

+1