the 30-49 year olds and the 50-and-up brackets are more closely aligned, at 39 percent and 37 percent respectively viewing it as negative.
I’m really surprised at the 30–49 bracket being at 39%. But, keep in mind there’s a huge gap in tech savviness and tech lifestyle between someone born in 1977 to someone born in 1996. Their impressionable years kicked off literally at opposite ends of the Digital/Tech revolution, so I guess that makes sense that way…
The difference between the 65+ bracket and the 50-64 bracket in the original data is larger than the gap between 50-64 and 30-49 on every chart I’ve examined so far (where they’re broken out by age), so the real break is at retirement. Which makes sense: retirees are less likely to be forced into proximity with LLMs whether they want to be or not. (Interestingly, the older demographics are also less likely to think they have enough control over interactions with “AI”.)
I’m in the middle of that bracket and am extremely negative about “AI” (LLMs, LDMs). I, and people born before me, grew up with technology. I sat on an Atari 1040 ST when I was 3 or 4.
There’s some stuff in the field of AI that’s really exciting, like, for example, neural networks trained for pattern recognition to identify cancerous growths in early stages with much higher reliability than humans. LLMs and LDMs are not that kind of useful technology. I know how LLMs work and so I know that the intersection between their advertised and actual capabillity is tiny. There’s no I in AI when it comes to LLMs. Yet they’re the biggest investment bubble of all time. That bubble is going to pop when the average investor comes to the inevitable conclusion, that the technology cannot deliver on its promises. Until that economic catastrophy happens, it’s fucking us in other ways on the way: wasting resources, negative impact on climate change, mental attrition (in those who rely on “AI”), depletion of seniority in all kinds of fields (using LLMs instead of training juniors), contributes to shifting of money to the capitalists, …
What’s not to hate about “AI”? If anything my “tech savviness” makes me hate it more than the “unsavvy”.
I’m on the low end and have heard nothing but distain for AI (aside from “cool chatbot, but why?” or experimenting with local LLMs to find useful use cases). I have also run a local LLM but I just don’t see the use case. Even for coding most of the effort goes into solving the problem, so if it is already solved in your head it isn’t gonna take much time to code it. An no, LLMs can’t solve the problem any better than stackoverflow could (good luck on the novel problems).
Oh and don’t forget to mention that LLM providers are currently socialising the losses of their exorbitant investments through “creative” IPOs with immediate listing in indices.
I’m really surprised at the 30–49 bracket being at 39%. But, keep in mind there’s a huge gap in tech savviness and tech lifestyle between someone born in 1977 to someone born in 1996. Their impressionable years kicked off literally at opposite ends of the Digital/Tech revolution, so I guess that makes sense that way…
The difference between the 65+ bracket and the 50-64 bracket in the original data is larger than the gap between 50-64 and 30-49 on every chart I’ve examined so far (where they’re broken out by age), so the real break is at retirement. Which makes sense: retirees are less likely to be forced into proximity with LLMs whether they want to be or not. (Interestingly, the older demographics are also less likely to think they have enough control over interactions with “AI”.)
I’m in the middle of that bracket and am extremely negative about “AI” (LLMs, LDMs). I, and people born before me, grew up with technology. I sat on an Atari 1040 ST when I was 3 or 4. There’s some stuff in the field of AI that’s really exciting, like, for example, neural networks trained for pattern recognition to identify cancerous growths in early stages with much higher reliability than humans. LLMs and LDMs are not that kind of useful technology. I know how LLMs work and so I know that the intersection between their advertised and actual capabillity is tiny. There’s no I in AI when it comes to LLMs. Yet they’re the biggest investment bubble of all time. That bubble is going to pop when the average investor comes to the inevitable conclusion, that the technology cannot deliver on its promises. Until that economic catastrophy happens, it’s fucking us in other ways on the way: wasting resources, negative impact on climate change, mental attrition (in those who rely on “AI”), depletion of seniority in all kinds of fields (using LLMs instead of training juniors), contributes to shifting of money to the capitalists, … What’s not to hate about “AI”? If anything my “tech savviness” makes me hate it more than the “unsavvy”.
I’m on the low end and have heard nothing but distain for AI (aside from “cool chatbot, but why?” or experimenting with local LLMs to find useful use cases). I have also run a local LLM but I just don’t see the use case. Even for coding most of the effort goes into solving the problem, so if it is already solved in your head it isn’t gonna take much time to code it. An no, LLMs can’t solve the problem any better than stackoverflow could (good luck on the novel problems).
Oh and don’t forget to mention that LLM providers are currently socialising the losses of their exorbitant investments through “creative” IPOs with immediate listing in indices.