2026-01-14 00:06 UTC
Replies (26)
-
@FrankHghTwr@meow.social 2026-01-15 03:36
@lokeloski@mastodon.social And like I said the last time I saw it: no one considers asking the script writer or the concept artist or whatever... because when they do it's always boring stuff like "oh I just need to know what scene this character last appeared in, and I can do that with Ctrl+F"
-
@faoluin@chitter.xyz 2026-01-15 18:45
@lokeloski@mastodon.social My job says we should only use it if we already have expertise on the subject... in which case, why use it at all?
-
@deborahh@cosocial.ca 2026-01-16 13:00
@mynameistillian@plush.city @lokeloski@mastodon.social ah, I see it now: *this* is at the root of why mandated AI use is so corrosive. Someone up the heirarchy, not understanding the complexity of the work of their subordinates, thinks they are replaceable by the machine. Hmm. I need to think on this.
-
@wakame@tech.lgbt 2026-01-15 20:01
@lokeloski@mastodon.social Here at the "extremely cheap marketing" department, we tell people that it's okay to use gen AI for everything.
-
@AdrianRiskin@kolektiva.social 2026-01-15 21:28
@lokeloski@mastodon.social It's the Gell-Mann amnesia effect all over again. ----------- The Gell-Mann amnesia effect is a claimed cognitive bias describing the tendency of individuals to critically assess media reports in a domain they are knowledgeable about, yet continue to trust reporting in other areas despite recognizing similar potential inaccuracies. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gell-Mann_amnesia_effect
-
@dascandy@infosec.exchange 2026-01-15 22:20
@lokeloski@mastodon.social GenAI is like a filler, like Bondo. It can take something roughly shaped like the thing you want and smooth it out in all places - but at no point will it actually create things. And like many car fixers that start using filler will tell you, if you use a lot of filler you don't end up with anything functional.
-
@ratsnakegames@mastodon.social 2026-01-15 22:32
@lokeloski@mastodon.social the subtext here is also that at least some artists do not consider other artistic fields "real" art
-
@gkrnours@mastodon.gamedev.place 2026-01-15 22:34
@lokeloski@mastodon.social dev seems to be the only one thinking they can replace their own job with AI and everything will be fine
-
@distractal@hachyderm.io 2026-01-15 22:35
@lokeloski@mastodon.social Really kind of gets back to cultural acceptance of the idea of "unskilled labor", labor as just something that can be swapped out and dehumanized, merely a resource, a tool, not a high-context manifestation of human effort.
-
@Oggie@woof.group 2026-01-15 22:49
@lokeloski@mastodon.social https://bsky.app/profile/magicmooshka.bsky.social/post/3mbyyc2lhg22s The person who wrote it apparently!
-
@baibold@mastodon.social 2026-01-15 23:05
@lokeloski@mastodon.social AI generation is a useful facimile in a place where nothing would have also been a more or less acceptable alternative. Which begs the question as to why we're wasting so much money on it.
-
@mark@mastodon.fixermark.com 2026-01-15 23:17
@lokeloski@mastodon.social Nice! It's like the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect, but for AI output.
-
@Efilroftsul@mastodon.social 2026-01-15 23:26
@lokeloski@mastodon.social I wonder if this is an Adobe Creative Campus.
-
@jplebreton@mastodon.social 2026-01-15 23:36
@lokeloski@mastodon.social Interesting I've also observed a dynamic where if someone - most commonly programmers - sees an LLM producing output that passes initial inspection or does something that they would consider a mark of human-level competence, there's a chance that they're completely beguiled by it and conclude from that point on that LLMs are now basically operating at approximately that competence level across *all fields*. The psychodynamics of it are really alarming and, clearly, socially corrosive.
-
@The4thCircle@mastodon.gamedev.place 2026-01-15 23:54
@lokeloski@mastodon.social This is why CEOs assume it can do everything, because they don't know how to do anything.
-
@eruwero@ieji.de 2026-01-16 00:24
@lokeloski@mastodon.social and CEOs think it can replace everything. I wonder why...
-
@DenOfEarth@mas.to 2026-01-16 01:23
@lokeloski@mastodon.social I recently went to an opera where the composer was not only present but also performing as one of the soloists, among five other vocalists, along with a men's choir, accompanied by a full orchestra. The backdrop to this rich contribution to human musical art was AI visuals projected onto a screen.
-
@wobweger@mstdn.social 2026-01-16 02:50
@lokeloski@mastodon.social alt-text screenshot of post by magicmooshka from Jan 7: recently my friend's comics professor told her that it's acceptable to use gen AI for script-writing but not for art, since a machine can't generate meaningful artistic work. meanwhile, my sisters screenwriting professor said that they can use gen AI for concept art and visualization, but that it won't be able to generate script that's any good. and at my job, 1/2
-
@geeeero@mastodon.social 2026-01-16 07:48
@lokeloski@mastodon.social Very well put. To me, this is similar to the Gell-Mann amnesia effect, where for subjects we have deep knowlege about, we see all the flaws in media reports, but tend to assume that for all other subjects, the media reports are basically fine. @davidgerard@circumstances.run https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gell-Mann_amnesia_effect?wprov=sfla1
-
@bovaz@misskey.social 2026-01-16 08:22
@lokeloski@mastodon.social I just shared this at work. With some of the people pushing for AI integration everywhere.
-
@bartholin@fops.cloud 2026-01-16 08:38
@lokeloski@mastodon.social or programmers asking LLMs to generate code for them, because they cannot code
-
@arnotron@noc.social 2026-01-16 08:52
@lokeloski@mastodon.social I call that Mount Stupid
-
@woo@fosstodon.org 2026-01-16 09:13
@lokeloski@mastodon.social Fortunately for AI pushers, most people are ignorant about most things. Optimistically, the Inverse 80/20 rule applies.
-
@xerge@mastodon.nl 2026-01-16 09:29
@lokeloski@mastodon.social I’ve seen this attitude even in some highly skilled people. The idea that what they’re doing is obviously complex and requires deep knowledge and skills, but work that others are doing is obviously trivial. Very surprising. It’s not uncommon for undergraduates to assume some field is easy, because the introductory course they had on it was, but for accomplished professors to have similar ideas about fields outside of their expertise? Why? Is there a psychologist in the house?
-
@beemoh@mastodonapp.uk 2026-01-16 09:42
@lokeloski@mastodon.social An extra step to this I saw elsewhere- "People think it can do things except the things they personally are competent to do. Which is why the C Suite thinks it can do everything"
-
@JigmeDatse@social.openpsychology.net 2026-01-16 09:50
@lokeloski@mastodon.social Why do I always find it at best questionable for any field I look at? Like, "yeah that kind of feels like that's maybe decent, but I'd have to check out to see if it's actually stupid..." Ah well, because it's always stupid when I have the slightest bit of a clue.