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

Latest Breaking News

not fooled

(6,594 posts)

7. Yep.

Reply to cstanleytech (Reply #3)

Sat Dec 27, 2025, 01:58 PM

Saturday

AI seems to me to be useful for answering simple, factual questions that benefit from sweeping reviews of large amounts of information, Or, of course, performing well-defined rote tasks that can be automated.

But compare with a human brain when it comes to extrapolating from existing information to create something new, such as writing a story? No way. Or, in my experience, analyzing and interpreting complex visual images, such as of art and antiques. I use reverse image searches to price items I'm considering buying at auction. Google Images which I assume is AI based does a wretched job most of the time, frequently missing the era entirely or wrongly guessing the nature and function of an item. I'm not technically sophisticated enough to define why AI sucks at this, but...it does.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

21 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

An AI pioneer says the technology is 'limited' and won't replace humans anytime soon [View all] BumRushDaShow Saturday OP

If it don't make pizza, it ain't worth nothing. /nt bucolic_frolic Saturday #1

Might I add that you can only divide the pie of potential users so far. There is no way all of these data flashman13 Saturday #2

In the end I think what you'll see is Amazo, Microsoft and Google be the dominant three. cstanleytech Saturday #4

In the end the big guys will gobble up everyone else for pennies on the dollar. flashman13 Saturday #5

Well I got agree there as when it comes to writing they are extremely limited. cstanleytech Saturday #3

Yep. not fooled Saturday #7

Even it's factual questions can be flawed so you should always verify as some Trump lawyers are learning right now. cstanleytech Saturday #14

So don't use AI for writing. Anything you write with it isn't your work anyway and can't be copyrighted. highplainsdem Saturday #11

I don't, I have tested it out though and it's just not at the point where it'll replace a human being. cstanleytech Saturday #13

One serious limit: AI bots are completely incapable of actual logic William Seger Saturday #6

While he's correct, it doesn't matter. Shipwack Saturday #8

AI isn't really that much intelligence (for now at least), it is automation on steroids ToxMarz Saturday #9

I heard the same thing from an industry insider mdbl Saturday #10

The venture capital bubble may burst, but that's not going to stop the research. LudwigPastorius Saturday #12

That article is nothing but pro-AI hype from someone incapable of being objective about AI. He's highplainsdem Saturday #15

I totally agree. When the IT revolution rolled in during the late 60s, early 70s/80s, we were just seeing the beginning SWBTATTReg Saturday #16

We already have examples of computer aided 'reality' presentations. Aussie105 Yesterday #17

The only benefit I can see from any of this is to the employers FakeNoose Yesterday #18

One setting of Ara does indeed talk back Polybius Yesterday #19

Company owners and bosses don't use that setting FakeNoose Yesterday #20

Yep, that's true Polybius Yesterday #21