Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Bernie Sanders: The Public Should Own Half of the Big A.I. Companies (NYT, 6/1/2026) [View all]highplainsdem
(63,323 posts)29. My "assumptions" were based on what you'd told me.
You initially wrote:
We used AI to visualize several design options
Which made it sound as if you simply asked the AI to give you several images of replacement landscaping. You didn't explain in that first message that you'd given an image generator multiple detailed prompts.
Though even with detailed prompts, you probably didn't get the exact images you were hoping for, at least not immediately.
And most people can visualize without needing AI to spit out an image for them. I hope AI users won't lose that ability.
Re the plants you had AI choose for you:
Can you give one reason why I would spend days do that if I have technology to do do it in an hour?
The main reason is that if you're aware that genAI was trained unethically and illegally, then deciding to use it anyway, if you aren't forced to by school or a job, is an unethical decision that shows a lack of concern for all the people whose work was stolen to train the AI. And that theft is ongoing, every hour of every day.
And another important reason is that you wouldn't have needed days to check out which plants of particular types were best for that location. Regular searches will find that information quickly. And you'll also pick up other info while searching, rather than letting the AI filter your options and what you learn.
And since genAI is very good at hallucinations, I hope you checked all of its results instead of assuming it was correct. Unfortunately a lot of AI users don't bother, and studies have indicated that the more someone uses AI, the less likely they are to check, even if they know genAI hallucinates.
Maybe you saved a few minutes, after you included time spent time checking to make sure the AI hadn't hallucinated. Maybe you saved an hour or two. I wouldn't assume you saved much more time. And you might've found something you preferred to what the AI chose for you, if you'd done the research without AI.
Plus you'd have been doing more thinking, and learning.
You wrote:
A cognitive burden would be to refuse to understand the usefulness of technology.
There's good and bad technology. With genAI, how it was trained + the error rate + the dumbing down of users (confirmed by studies including Microsoft's) + all the myriad harms make it bad tech.
I have nothing against tech in general.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
30 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Bernie Sanders: The Public Should Own Half of the Big A.I. Companies (NYT, 6/1/2026) [View all]
highplainsdem
19 hrs ago
OP
A 50% STATE TAKEOVER of private companies is not the answer... it's overreach.
QueerDuck
14 hrs ago
#24
Ownership of an AI built on public data is just. It gives the public class action standing in federal court.
ancianita
12 hrs ago
#28
How does that help pay for the food, health, and shelter of the tens of millions of people who will lose their jobs
Doodley
19 hrs ago
#2
It isn't enough. Ideally, generative AI models trained illegally should be destroyed, with new legal AI models
highplainsdem
18 hrs ago
#4
I understand what you are saying, but the genie is already out of the bottle. This is where we are, and
Doodley
18 hrs ago
#6
Just using AI dumbs users down and makes them dependent on AI. There are few if any good uses
highplainsdem
17 hrs ago
#9
I've used it enough to know how it works and how tempting it can seem. And I've read thousands of
highplainsdem
17 hrs ago
#19
With all due respect, I don't think you understand how incredibly useful AI is.
Doodley
16 hrs ago
#21
With all due respect, you asked AI to give you ideas and tell you where to shop. IMO that's an example
highplainsdem
15 hrs ago
#22
Try all it's tech we paid for. In-Q-Tel funds or should I just say CIA.
Blue Full Moon
18 hrs ago
#5
Same here. But as I said above, in the meantime I like seeing regulations and penalties on AI suggested
highplainsdem
17 hrs ago
#11
It isn't true that "Training is Learning, Not Storing" - that's AI company propaganda to try to defend
highplainsdem
17 hrs ago
#15
Thanks for the information. There is also a lot of people who have formed an opinion about AI
Doodley
17 hrs ago
#16
With what? 40% don't have enough cash to cover a $1000 emergency expense.
thesquanderer
6 hrs ago
#30