• Ragnarok314159@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Yes, but now we can get much worse results and three pages of ads for ten times the energy cost. Capitalism at its finest.

    • Halosheep@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      I use generative ai sometimes, and I find it useful for certain usecases.

      Are you just following the in ternate hate bandwagon or do you really think it’s no good?

      • nicky_stromboli@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Generative AI has yet to actually solve a real business problem, let alone a problem that consumers actually have.

        It’s creating content that floods internet spaces and workplace wikis faster than we can sort it.

        AI-generated content is basically plastic: disposable, cheaper and worse quality than alternatives (human labor), and once it enters the ocean (the internet) will require humans to manually fish out and dispose of.

  • jj4211@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    8 months ago

    The confounding part is that when I do get offered an “AI result”, it’s basically identical to the excerpt in the top “traditional search” result. It wasted a fair amount more time and energy to repeat what the top of the search said anyway. I’ve never seen the AI overview ever be more useful than the top snippet.

  • ArchRecord@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    If only they did what DuckDuckGo did and made it so it only popped up in very specific circumstances, primarily only drawing from current summarized information from Wikipedia in addition to its existing context, and allowed the user to turn it off completely in one click of a setting toggle.

    I find it useful in DuckDuckGo because it’s out of the way, unobtrusive, and only pops up when necessary. I’ve tried using Google with its search AI enabled, and it was the most unusable search engine I’ve used in years.

  • repungnant_canary@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    I’m genuinely curious where their penny picking went? All of tech companies shove ads into our throats and steal our privacy justifying that by saying they operate at loss and need to increase income. But suddenly they can afford spending huge amounts on some shit that won’t give them any more income. How do they justify it then?

    • HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      8 months ago

      Perception. If a company isn’t on the leading edge we don’t consider them the best.

      Regardless if you use them or not, if Google didn’t touch AI but Edge did you would believe edge is more advanced.

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

      Because data is king and sessions are going to be worth a lot more than searches. Go through the following

      1. Talk to a LLM about what product to buy

      2. Search online for a product to buy

      Which one gives out more information about yourself?

  • just_another_person@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    To be fair, it was never “hidden” since all the top 5 decided that GPU was the way to go with this monetization.

    Guess who is waiting on the other side of this idiocy with a solution? AMD with cheap FPGA that will do all this work at 10x the speed and similar energy reduction. At a massive fraction of the cost and hassle for cloud providers.

  • DarkCloud@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    8 months ago

    If these guys gave a shit they’d focus on light based chips, which are in very early stages, but will save a lot of power.

  • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    8 months ago

    This is terrible. Why don’t we build nuclear power plants, rollout a carbon tax, and put incentives for companies to make their own energy via renewables?

    You know the shit that we should have been doing before I was born.

  • Virkkunen@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    Don’t worry folks, if we all stop using plastic straws and take 30 second showers, we’ll be able to offset 5% of the carbon emissions this AI has!

    • nialv7@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Sounds like not using Google search would be a way more effective way of reducing CO2

    • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Google ghg emissions in 2023 are 14.3 million metric tons. Which are a ridiculous percentage of global emissions.

      Commercial aviation emissions are 935.000 million metric tons by year.

      So IDK about plastic straws or google. But really if people stopped flying around so much that would actually make a dent on global emissions.

      Don’t get me wrong, google is a piece of shit. But they are not the ones causing climate change, neither is AI technology. Planes, cars, meat industry, offshore production… Those are some of the truly big culprits.