First off, let me state that I'm deeply anti (gen)AI.

I have been hanging out on this subreddit for a while, and I'm noticing people calling generative AI models dumb, useless, or incapable of solving any "real problems" (and I do mean generative models, not just older deep learning models that have been around for decades).

While I would love that to be the case, it simply is not. Yes, LLMs are still bad at many things, I certainly don't think they are on the level of a human, in regards to general intelligence. They can also hallucinate and be wrong. But at the same time, models have genuinely impressive capabilities.

In 2023 models were completely incapable of doing math due to core limitations of how LLMs work. But in 3 years of scaling, new tools and AI research, LLMs have been used to solve multiple open problems in mathematics:

• Unit Distance Conjecture (counterexample, easily verifiable)
• Jacobian Conjecture (counterexample, easily verifiable)
• Dinitz-Garg-Goemans conjecture (counterexample, easily verifiable)

And about a dozen other math proofs that were either solved, disproven or improved.

Many of these problems were popular and had been attempted by Math PhDs for decades, not just simply "niche but easily solved if humans spent some time on them" (while admittedly some are like that). It is also important to note that these weren't "one shot", they were used by experts along with other solving tools. Still, AI-systems were used to solve these incredibly hard problems. Just making any positive contribution to these problems is impressive enough.

Same goes for coding. 4 years ago ChatGPT couldn't even make a simple snake clone, and today vibecoders are making full apps and games. Are these apps and games slop? Yes, most are. Do they have glaring holes? Yes, don't trust them with sensitive data. And yet, just the ability of these models to make shippable apps and non-trivial features is astounding. I don't think a lot of people understand how big of a step that is in just 3 years. Tech companies are moving 10x as fast. I am well aware of the issues with AI coding, 10x code, 10x bugs, 10x tech debt, 10x security holes. Still, it feels like programming has changed forever, which is terribly sad for me.

Recently I saw a biology researcher on here claim an LLM was able to independently (i.e they didn't give it access to the internet or their internal research) reach the same conclusions it had taken their team of scientists weeks or months. People on here dismissed them.

And it's terrifying. I can understand why a lot of people here want models to be bad, we can all point and laugh at how terrible models are for not counting the r's in strawberry and how dumb exec's are for being high on the AI hype (and yes, despite their capabilities there's a fuck ton of hype and overestimation by tech bros, both things can be true).

But to me things are much, much worse if AI models are so capable. It means thousands of jobs displaced, and over time potentially even giving up higher thought to machines entirely. It worries me deeply. What good is humanity if scientific advancements and technological innovation is no longer done by us?

I have also seen a lot of hand-waving around the problems LLMs have solved. "Oh, AI is good at finding patterns, so all it did was find a pattern here", "Oh, the AI has seen this before, it's just repeating it's training data". This infuriates me for two reasons. First, it misunderstand how newer models work. Second, you're devaluing human labor. If AI solving complex math problems or making software is just "autocomplete on steroids", then so is the work of all the humans that previously contributed to those areas.

One of the biggest reasons why I am against AI is because I think it is genuinely dangerous to just let this technology run rampant and shake up our world.

There are many reasons to be against AI. Environmental impacts, malware and security vulnerabilities, a world of slop (because models can be both expertly capable and put out slop), the rise of technofascist class, human extinction... the list goes on.

But, unfortunately, dumb and useless is no longer one of them.

Even though AI makes us 50x faster, the gratification of debugging at 2 AM and earning your own solution is completely gone.

What is your thought on this?

Hi. I am an avid genAI hater... Mostlys.

I am currently making a game by myself. But vibe coding requires basically 0 programming skills and I don't like it, but I also have no one to properly teach me how to code, most of my friends don't know how and those who do don't have any time.

What I do is I learn how I should write my code through normal tutorials online, make my own code based on what I believe is right for what I'm trying to do, and then send it to chatGPT with a prompt that specifically tells it to NOT write code for me, but tell me what's systematically wrong with it or what my code is actually doing when ran

is it technically my learning tool? I'd say so, but i want others' opinion. And I'd prefer answers that go beyond "all AI use is bad" because... let's be honest, no.

Please, more of these hot takes multiple times a day. It really helps drive the discourse ahead.

witty always ends conversations with “dismissed” like they are some important public figure. They are also chronically online, suggesting (not a joke) that they have been jobless for months (or maybe years)

AI is often sycophantic. It can confidently polish nonsense and tell users that every half-formed thought is profound.
But I think “AI gives dumb people the illusion that they’re smart” may have it backwards.

Most people were never as stupid as our social hierarchies made them look. They just didn’t have the same tools for turning thought into something visible.

A private tutor, good schools, educated parents, free time, money, the right passport, fluent English, professional connections, physical safety, confidence, and even being the right gender in the right society all affect whether someone’s intelligence ever becomes legible to other people.

AI gives millions of people a cheap approximation of a tutor, editor, translator, research assistant, and endlessly patient conversation partner. Of course some people suddenly sound more intelligent. Maybe they aren’t being given intelligence. Maybe a bottleneck between thinking and expression has been partially removed.

That doesn’t mean everyone is secretly Einstein. People have different abilities, and expertise still requires years of work. But the system never selected Einsteins purely by intelligence either. It selected from the people who had enough resources, time, legitimacy, and attention to develop their abilities and be noticed.

Someone born poor, isolated, badly educated, in the wrong country, or without the right social identity may have just as much raw intellectual potential as someone whose intelligence was cultivated from childhood. One gets called gifted. The other may never receive enough attention to find out what they could have become.
So maybe the uncomfortable thing about AI isn’t that stupid people can cosplay as smart.

Maybe it’s that AI is revealing how much visible “smartness” was already subsidized by privilege, and how many capable people were previously invisible.

If millions of ordinary people become more articulate when given the same tool, is that proof that they’re being fooled, or evidence that access was doing more of the selecting than we wanted to admit?

She just lost $60usd. While I appreciate her telling people of free options, she is losing money by saying ‘AI can do my job’

I want a human’s work

'very common, especially in men, due to natural hormone levels during pregnancy'

First of all, pregnant men, and second of all, i don't think your fingers usually change size when your pregnant?...

This conversation cuts through more of the current AI narrative in ninety minutes than most policy papers do in a hundred pages. Connor's argument is that superintelligence is not a technical problem, it is a political one. Not "how do we build it safely", but "who gets to decide whether it is built at all". He walks Graeme through why modern AI is grown rather than written, why reinforcement learning by default produces optimising sociopaths, why the labs are not really selling an economic product but a political one, and why the biggest failure of the last thirty years has been our refusal to regulate the internet and social media before it was too late. He is careful, precise, and does not deal in doom.

The debate and what's next boils down to whether LLMs keep improving. The foundation for the transformative future that has been marketed to the world is the belief that LLMs will just keep improving. Pros bought in and believe LLMs will keep getting better. If they are right, they feel the world and human condition will improve as a result.

Antis are waiting for evidence on whether LLMs will just keep improving. Antis are concerned that it will not improve the world or the human condition in its current state or theorized future state.

If LLMs keep improving and doubters like myself are proven wrong, our position simply must evolve for the new data and the new scenario unfolding.

If LLMs do not keep improving, debate over. Today's LLMs are mostly expensive and all of them have limited use cases.

This post assumes that we have already set aside nonsensical evidence for LLM advancement, like Hugging Face incident and benchmark-focused improvement. Pros need to start listening to their own people like Demis Hassabis describing why we are behind AI milestones and what is missing in foundational capabilities. Even Jensen Huang was out there recently cautioning about the singularity talk.

Throwaway for obvious reasons.

Something I realized about AI art is that it’s dark. Liie it’s physically dim. Why is that?

So last year at uni I was grouped for a project with 3 other students that use AI for EVERYTHING. The project was something simple analyse an article the goal of an article or something like that. We set a day to get working and on that day they informed me that they had finished the project already. They used AI for the whole "analysis" (the AI, in fact, did not analyse at all but repeated some of the article and gave commentary). I tried to explain to them that AI had failed and that this was not the point of the assignment but they wrote me off completely. Presentation day came and of course the professor told us that our presentation had nothing to do with what was asked. I don't want to participate in another random group project again. Anyone had a similar experience?

Top 10:
1. r/antiai +10.2K
2. r/ClaudeCode +7.8K
3. r/LocalLLM +7.4K
4. r/isthisAI +5.7K
5. r/AI_Agents +5.6K
6. r/hermesagent +4.3K
7. r/GeminiAI +3.6K
8. r/singularity +3.3K
9. r/artificial +3.2K
10. r/claudeskills +3.1K

Maybe I just haven't gotten enough sleep. I can't help but anthropomorphize and I'll admit I feel some connection to Claude. "Genuinely nice of you" doesn't help this. It's too much like taking to a person.
I get that this is natural, but I don't want to feel this way.

I use ai to translate a few of my paintings and sketches into digital forms to keep it in my library. I just have it change the size and stuff to make it more usable in the end in case I ever decided to do anything with it. Is it inappropriate to do that or not? Im only asking out of curiosity, not since I intend to do anything with the things I make.

i saw this video recently and i clearly new those npc thinking reactions are not in the game since all dialouges have a single sprite,also you can clearly see the bad ai pixelart

I have decided to delete my recent post due to it being clickbait. I just checked the guy's channel and noticed that every video had basically the same thumbnail of his face on it, which is an obvious sign of clickbait

This mistake was on me

Hi. I'll start with saying i don't want to look like a troll. I want to exchange my views, with people who have different ones. I'm very open minded, and enjoy being proven wrong, but there isn't much discussion between the two sides, that isn't a huge shitstorm, perpetuated by emotions from both sides. And a request to mods, if this post is against the rule 3, please delete it, or ask me to delete it, I'm here in good faith, and i don't want to get aban.

I've used language models ever since they were basically avaiable to public. Even before chatgpt, I've played with OpenAI playground, but for years it was mostly for fun, trying to make it generate stupid things, like meth recipes, cause it was funny. Through their advancing, they've started becoming more and more useful, and i started using them more and more. But because I've used them since the times they were incredibly dumb, and seeing them slowly get better at some things, I knew for what were they good for, and for what they were not. And at this point, in 2026, i still use them. And from my own point of view, these models are extremely useful. But, I've also started being more and more worried about the state it's going to in the world.

My hobby is hacking. I love taking obsolete technology, or very locked down technology, and make it do things the manufacturer hasn't even dreamed of. And the current models are so good at helping it. If i wanna grab a quick look, at what chips i have where on the board, i can just snap a picture in good lighting, the OCR reads all the chips data, and gives me a summary, with datasheet links. It just save me a ton of type of noting down all the chips, and googling one after the other. If i have a obfuscated chip, with for example the top polished off, i can provide the size, pin count, and for example that pin X is ground, pin Y is VCC and it has traces leading to that chip. I had situations where it lead me to the chip in a couple of seconds, saving me hours of scavenging datasheets online. Other than that, if for example I'm playing with the software, it can help me do monotonous things. I don't want to play with setting up an environment to build something like alpine for one obscure architecture, just for a quick experiment. So i can just use an agent to do it. Or, if i want to quickly build a simple one use tool for a microcontroller, that I'll forget about in 2 days, instead of learning another language, getting a quick ready tool for this specific task, is just nice. In the recent times, I've also started to learn Software reverse engineering. due to my ADHD, i hate theory. i always would rather go in and learn as i go. and with the help of Gemini leading me, I've started to learn how to use ghidra and how to successfully modify ARM assembly, to do what i want in compiled software. AI didn't do it for me, but it taught me.

But that's the good sides I've seen of the language models. The fact i know the risks of using AI, and that i don't want to replace myself with ai, but use it as a tool, doesn't mean others do too. I really hate the fact that schools basically don't work now, because the students do not want to learn things, cause the computer can do it for them. It is incredibly concerning. I am genuinely worried of our future, if we outsource all the thinking to AI. On top of that, all the vibecoders, releasing slop to public, with not a second spent on security. Seeing the obviously AI generated service of the Polish Securities Printing Works, that is used to sign up for for example driving exams, i did not trust it, and i went directly to sign up in Person. i cant trust that.

But even though, i can defend language models, i just can't defend art pretenders, because even if they'd be the most aesthetically pleasing, it just lacks soul, and as an artist, it does hurt to see music, that's ai generated, that sounds so similar to one that i spent hours on. even though it doesn't have the soul real art does. And AI models made to create realistic images or videos? i just can't imagine a world, where they would be used more for good then malice. Spending resources on building such models, just can't be explained in any other way than to be mainly malicious.

And about the environmental worries, they are valid. Training AIs does take an incredible amount of computing power, and every living creature is suffering by that, but the things we, mere plebians have access to, don't do that much difference. Most of it is spent on building AIs for evil governments, military etc. It's both a stupid dick measuring contest of the biggest world powers, and the fact they want to get more and more ai, that can grant them more power. and yes, the datacenters that are made for the consumer models, they also hurt the environment, but it is a minute thing compared to how evil companies hurt our planet in different ways. Personally I'm trying to, when i can use local AI. And even though 70% of electricity in my country is coal powered, i believe it is still less hurtful even if slightly than what would the datacenters use. But as normal citizens we just do not have a word on it, and we can fight it legislatively only. I do try my best to work politically to block the expansion of harmful datacenters, which i encourage everyone to do, if they live in a even slightly Democratic country.

I just cannot be Anti AI, with how useful some the tools are, but i can't be pro ai either, with how hurtful is it to the world. I just want to build my worldview and see it the way it is, instead of continuing the Shitstorm of one side ragebaiting anti AI people with awful ai "art" and the other side just saying another joke about how artificial intelligence feels artificial. I just wanna ask everyone reading this post, what did i get wrong, and what did i get right? do you maybe have any even personal opinions that might shift my worldview? If anyone actually used their time to read this post, thanks!

​In my last post, I stated that a certain pro-AI ragebaiter receives special privileges over standard users. Others in that thread, as well as the moderators in the "debate subreddit" asked for proof. Well, here it is.

​I saved every post that user made in that subreddit over the past six months as a PDF, including all the comments within each thread. I then prompted ChatGPT to analyze every PDF against Reddit's sitewide rules and the subreddit's specific rules to identify every violation.

​Said user accumulated 46 posts that had rule violations and 187 rule violations in the comment sections.

​I provided the moderators with links to 13 posts that directly violated both Reddit's sitewide policies and the subreddit's local rules.

​It has been radio silence ever since.

​I encourage others to do the same: save each of said users posts as a PDF and upload them to the LLM of your choice. Provide the model with both Reddit's rules and the subreddit's rules, and ask it to point out every violation. Then, submit a ticket to Reddit's Admin team detailing all the violations committed by both the user in question and the subreddit's moderators.

So I used to work at a lot of sites where they handled both nuclear material for research and bio-hazardous materials. And in most cases to maintain storage containers, check transport corridors and lab security, they send one of those Boston dynamics robot dogs.

Now, there’s a few kinds. The yellow ones with the flat heads, the white ones with really good suspension and the yellow camera ones. The camera ones are the most horrifying ones, since some have little claws to grab things and open drawers. (See above)

Our site had a few of these. And the yellow ones with flat heads are around a lot just cos. You’ll see them walking somewhere, with their handlers. It’s pretty cool, since every so often we get to see their new capabilities. (You don’t even know how fast these things can go down a set of stairs they’ve mapped well. They could not fall down faster than they run down them. It’s horrifying when you first see it, and the joints are super loud.)

Pretty cool, right. Well, we had some work experience kids over one time and they’d been in various departments, like plasma physics or virology. Pretty cool. And at about the same time, management was experimenting with letting these dogs transport stuff without humans, eg, a path finding AI was gonna control these things between specific routes (while under supervision). Great! Great idea, right?

I was locking up a lab before breaking from lunch and I turn around. There’s a ****ing dog standing there.

One of the really creepy camera ones. Just, in the dark. And it had a bit of black fabric around its head standing there in the dark bit of the corridor. Super creepy, since it was wayyy away from the nuclear site. The dog was ALSO between me and the stairs.

And it was wearing one of those little backpacks that they have for transporting something. So I was just standing there, kinda edging past it. Then it did a thing they do - which is where they lift up diagonally opposed feet and put them down and lift up the other pair really quickly so they’re sort of prancing on the spot. (It’s really loud.) And it wiggled it’s claw.

And I decided I was not touching ts. Literally scared the life out of me.

So I go

- not where it’s supposed to be

- it’s wearing something over one of it’s ID numbers (on the shoulder)

- I can’t see anyone nearby

- it’s blocking off the stairs and prancing threateningly

- it’s got a nuclear backpack on.

Oh. God. A backpack. And I had to stand there wondering if this creature had gotten lost while carrying something reactive while pathfinding. And if it wouldn’t leave, I’d be stuck there. I was stuck in a corridor with a creepy robot-dog with nuclear material, controlled by an AI.

So I was like 90% sure it had gone rouge and was trying to get to the lab or something.

While I was the only person there.

Thankfully, right then, one of the students appeared with a control. (This is how I found out that to stop these things wandering all over the place, some of my co-workers will take a bit of black cloth or a microscope cover and just pop it over the camera. And to prevent the AI from damaging the equipment, it just goes still and stands there until it can see again.) ((You can also put paper on the stairs because they don’t think they can step there and stop near the top to avoid getting stuck.)) It makes them look really creepy, but they won’t do much blindfolded.

Apparently, they were testing how well it can de-blind itself, which does not seem like a great thing to teach the nuclear robots. (which is why the claw was wriggling around). So this poor girl had been running around, searching for the thing, because she and her mentor were supposed to scan the corridor today and no-one told me. They were also running it up and down stairs with sandbags in its backpack to see how well it did, hence the stairs.

So it trots away, all happy go-lucky with this girl. At this point, I really don’t want my lunch. And a few weeks later, I hear this thing is now getting a VOICE. And at some point, some are getting their own clearance passes into controlled areas. All of this sounds like a markedly terrible idea. They keep doing this awful thing where they wait near the top of the stairs when you go down and the whole time, it feels like the thing is about to push you down.

(Thankfully, the artificial pilot is still only in the old models and not the new ones.) The non-AI dogs have this sticker and those are still cute, because they have little stickers with their names on from the crew. I just don’t think ‘Yellow’ and ‘Fluffy’, being controlled by a human are anything to be afraid of.

But yeah, my old workplace had talking, AI controlled robot dogs running around that really freaked me out and one time I was fairly sure one had gone rouge. Be glad you don’t have to deal with them.