What's a popular opinion on Lemmy that's unpopular in the real world?
What's a popular opinion on Lemmy that's unpopular in the real world?
104 comments
-
-
I’ve met a lot of people who don’t agree with “billionaires shouldn’t exist”
-
The propaganda is so strong with this one. If you talk to someone who owns just about anything, they somehow imagine you're coming after them and their stuff if you even mention anything like taxing the rich, much less getting rid of people who own more than some entire counties.
-
They just worked harder than the rest of us and had good ideas at the right time.
Erm, no, that still doesn’t make their labour worth thousands of times more than the next person.
People I talk to know millionaire workaholics and think that but for some timing that person would be a billionaire because they don’t understand how orders of magnitude work. 100k in the bank vs 1 million is a much smaller barrier than 1 million vs 1 billion never mind 100 billion
-
I don't think people would stop at billionaires. They'd keep going until it got uncomfortably close to their own level of wealth, but the people worse off than them wouldn't stop there, either.
-
-
-
- Linux
- Communism
- independent social media
-
"You should totally install Linux, Bro/Sis"
-
More like "What is Linux?"
-
Linux girlies are the goats
-
It’s a myth, no cisgender women, only transgender women and femboys, but yea they’re the goats
-
-
And if you install it often enough you might change from bro to sis /s
-
I've actually converted multiple family members to Linux, but it does take patience to work with them ensuring they can do everything they currently do
-
I’ve got my first
victimwindows refugee almost ready to switch! Just waiting for a good day when she has a lot of mental energy
-
-
-
"Eat the rich." Appearently people don't think they are tasty outside of Lemmy.
-
It's all about how you prepare the meat.
-
-
linux desktop and russian propaganda
-
That Lemmy is a worthwhile use of our time?
-
That’s the best one right there
-
-
I still have no idea what a Tankie is. As far as I can tell it only exists here on Lemmy and I might be one.
-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tankie
Tankie is a pejorative label generally applied to authoritarian communists, especially those who support or defend acts of repression by such regimes, their allies, or deny the occurrence of the events thereof. More specifically, the term has been applied to those who express support for one-party Marxist–Leninist socialist republics, whether contemporary or historical. It is commonly used by anti-authoritarian leftists, anarchists, libertarian socialists, left communists, social democrats, democratic socialists, and reformists to criticise Leninism, although the term has seen increasing use by liberal and right‐wing factions as well.[5][4]
-
As an example, I recently had someone unironically claim that china has more free speech than france, from a server hosted in france 🤦
-
France throws grenade at protesters.
-
-
If you want to see some non-lemmy tankies, check out https://raddle.me/.
-
The term came into use for communists who supported the Soviet Union sending in tanks to crush the Hungarian Revolution in 1956, with the commentary being that tankies supported Soviet imperialism over local revolution.
So supporting Palestine over Israel doesn't make someone a tankie, but supporting Russia over Ukraine does.
-
Not a Tankie! 🥳
-
-
It's just a variety of fascist, pretending to belong with ideologies and principles that are not compatible
-
The main "anti tankies" community here is modded by raging zionists
-
-
Fascism is bad
-
Lol fascism is not a popular opinion.
Reminder that the actual original nazis never had a majority in any democratic elections, its the loud minority that took control by force.
-
Fascism isn't a popular opinion
But being against it is unpopular
-
-
-
The person working the drive through at McDonald's should be paid a livable wage.
-
Because in the real world we all know no one is paying 20$ for a happy meal.
-
Some people absolutely will, or for even more than that. Fast food addiction is a serious problem for some. I've seen people spend over a hundred dollars on fast food when they could've gotten a week's worth of better food for that price instead.
-
Good thing it doesn't need to be $20, the corporate middleman leeches just need cut out of the equation.
-
-
-
You can offend 71+ million MAGA morons by saying how much Trump sucks. Hurts their feelings far more than they hurt the feelings of their enemies. The irony.
-
Saying Trump sucks is only a controversial opinion in america*
*and some other very right-wing countries I suppose
-
-
Political assassination
Veganism
Censorship
-
Linux is great actually, and Lemmy is cool.
-
WSWS.org is a reliable news site.
-
Russia want to invade Europe
Edit: stay classy, Lemmy.
-
-
Being "Federated" is more than simple connectivity to other sites.
104 comments
AI is untrustworthy and shouldn't be used
I have management talking about copilot usage rates and I hear people casually refer to "what ChatGPT told them" in conversation
The other day on Reddit someone was saying they just fact checked something with ChatGPT.
You can ask ChatGPT to provide sources you know.
I have a more nuanced take. AI is simultaneously untrustworthy and useful. For many queries, DuckDuckGo and Google are performing considerably worse than they used to, while Perplexity usually yields good results. Perplexity also handles complex queries traditional search engines just can't.
About a third of the time, Perplexity's text summary of what it found is inaccurate; it may even say the opposite of what a source does. Reading the sources and evaluating their reliability is no less important than with traditional search, but much of the time I think I wouldn't have found the same sources that way.
Of course there are other issues with AI, such as power usage and Perplexity in particular being known for aggressive web scraping.
Nuance and depth isn't as popular as I'd like on or off Lemmy.
Ah, but you see, I never claimed AI isn't useful. In fact, you can check my comment history. I've agreed AI is a very useful tool, I still think it shouldn't be used for ethical, social, and personal reasons
A problem with nuance is that people want to discuss the specifics and nuances of what they care about but for the most part won't do that on subjects for other people. So you need to tailor your responses to your audience. FWIW on Lemmy I see a lot more instances of people with specificly opposed takes where both sides have similar vote counts. So while it's not perfect it's better than most
I've found it to be extremely useful for stuff like one-off powershell commands that I'll use like 3x in my career.
Just today I was trying to find the command line switches for disk2vhd, and none of the top results, even the official page for the app, had them.
But Google's AI had them and provided sources I could use to verify the information.
But people didn't do that last part before AI, so I can see why it's an issue.
I think ddg and Google are performing worse because of AI. Pushing their AI services and the tsunami of AI slop make a search harder than SEO did and deprioritizes fixing it.
I think current state-of-the-art AI is useful for when you are not having a novel thought.
I believe that AI, at least in the form of LLMs, is currently incapable of novelty in the sense of creating a new concept or a new thought with reason and purpose behind it.
For instance, if I was going to write a book, I might consult with LLMs about how to fill in the slow gaps or the dead spaces in my storyline and to fully come up with a completely fleshed out story that I would then write without its assistance.
My assumption is that anything that it fills in is going to be cobbled together from literally hundreds of thousands of other similar stories, and therefore it will not be new or unique in any way.
If I was really trying to push the envelope, I would then assume that the right thing to do would be that whatever it says is ordinary and common, and if I want to be extraordinary and uncommon, then I need to use that as a launch point for my own gap-filling content.
Therefore, I could use an LLM to write a good story with a new concept, a new premise, a new storyline that is relatively unique and original by using the LLM to clearly identify those things that are not.
I have people telling me how to do my work because "That's what ChatGPT suggested, and they're always accurate".
🤷
Actual AGI would be trustworthy. The current "AI" is just a word salad blender program.
Would it? I run a science fiction book club and there're a lot of arguments that if something achieved human level intelligence that it would immediately try to kill us, not become our perfect servants
It could be argued that people are AGI. Are they always trustworthy?
I think it is useful with a constrained dataset. Like using it to summarize things about a dataset, or dumping documents into it and asked getting info about it (like Gemini in Google Drive).
It is not useful for general question using the whole-ass internet as a dataset.
Also I wish it was called something other than AI...it's just a word guesser FFS.
We should are least refer to inference LLMs as LLMs. The fact that if you asked it something like who is the current CS2 top team, it would give you the top team at the time it was trained is enough proof that the models effectively know nothing.
As a software developer I fully agree. People bash on it constantly here but the fact is is that it's required for our jobs now. I just made it through a job hunt and every tech screen I did they not only insisted on me using AI, but they figured how much I was using too.
The fact is is that like it or not it does speed us up, and it is a tool in our toolbelt. You don't have to trust it 100% or blindly accept what it does, but you do need to be able to use it. Refusing to use it is like refusing to use the designer for WinForms 20 years ago, or refusing to use an IDE at work. You're going to be at a massive disadvantage to your competing jobseekers who are more than happy to use AI.
This is not a fact at all.
I review take home assignments and mostly we receive AI submissions. It's easy to tell when they aren't AI though because we get thoughtful comments about why one choice was made over another, and comments on the higher level view that only come from product context and experience. I don't think one single fully ai-created submission has made it passed the code review part.
i actively zone out when anyone higher up than me talks about copilot or chat gpt. i also dressed down a colleague for using chat gpt for a stupid simple task.
Depends on the subject
how to say with this. I see pretty much an equal split between ai is best thing ever, ai will doom us all, and like ai has some uses and may get more but we need to make sure any use is worth the energy usage.