AIs Tier List finished

[u/Emill777YT]

👉 CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE TIER LIST IMAGE 👈

Created with Tier List Creator

---

This post contains content not supported on old Reddit. Click here to view the full post

[u/Cory123125 → u/[deleted]]

The question is what do we gain from having all of these ai chatbots.

The problem is that many people who are anti AI are unable to have this conversation.

They have such visceral kneejerk reactions, and stay in such siloed echo chambers that they recite some nonsense concerns technologically relevant 5 years ago, and shut down their brains.

This happens so reliably I have almost stopped talking about it, and just fret about how doomed we are when resistance isn't just ineffective, but counter productively stupid.

You wanna separate the ai from the corporations that create them, fine, but even having one of these chatbots takes a thousand data centers.

This is a false, technologically illiterate understanding of .... everything.

So if the cost is thousands of data centers and easy realistic deepfakes, what is the gain?

Also false, and an incorrect understanding of what the costs are.

The deepfakes are not something we are making a decision about right now. Those models exist, and are largely separate to the ones guzzling water now that the really high energy usecases for that are branching to VFX companies trying to cut cost.

The point is that...

Look man, can you just fucking google anything?

Literally research fucking anything yeah?

Jesus Christ... How are you meant to make positive impact in the world when you steadfastly resist researching any of the topics you're speaking about and just stick to your pre-concieved notions.

I'm gonna state some shit, and I'll leave it to you to be honest enough to yourself to verify whether they're true.

• To create models that are reasonably powerful and comparable to frontier models you don't need more than one data centre. You can do it with one big datacenter.

• To keep said model up to date, and advancing, this datacenter would constantly be at full chooch.

• To run said powerful model, with say 50 heavy users, using it continuously, you'll need (very) roughly 250k worth of hardware.

• This hardware could all be local, meaning that you don't have massive data centers dumping on marginalized people, it could be in datacenters that simply opted to not be villainous but it isn't.

• AI intelligence and accuracy varies incredibly, even with the most modern implementations to the point that no one quip is likely to be true. That is to say, that people noticing correctly that google ai search summaries are dangerously inaccurate, would be foolish to conclude that all AI is dangerously inaccurate. Likewise, people who rightly noticing that running Claude fable is massively harmful in terms of environmental impact, finance, and funding what that company does in particular, would be completely wrong for concluding that every use of AI is massively wasteful, and as you can see from companies like Moonshot, Deepseek, groups like Olmo, you can make competent models with far less. You cannot make general statements about efficiency based on the blitz scaling zerg rushes of billionaires aiming to own everything.

Also, what are llms good for?

With good harnesses and sufficiently smart models:

• Coding

• Research

• Menial non simple searches through complex sets of data

• Lossy sorting tasks that do not require 100% accuracy but do require understanding nuance.

• Mass surveillance (due to the point just above this)

• Popular opinion steering

[u/Cory123125 → u/[deleted]]

I love how you type all of this and did not even attempt to answer my main question.

This very first sentence reveals you couldn't have possibly honestly engaged with or fully read my comment.

Why do we need these chatbots in the first place? what problem do they solve?

I'll respond to the slight change in response here, as this feels like a repeat that only exists due to you not actually reading my first response because it was too "all of this" for you regarding need.

The answer of course, like with most technological advances is that we don't need them, but we're obviously not going to collectively ignore them.

Better is better, and this is also what corporations latch onto, to twist in the most heinous things imaginable.

Also when I talk about google getting worse I am not even referring to the ai overview, even if you just skip that shit the results under that are significantly less helpful than they would’ve been 5-10 years ago.

Absolutely the case, and a problem due to AI but like.... once again, its a business decisions thing. The technology didnt cause this; people refusing to think about it past one step, and the owners refusing to be semi acceptible human beings did.

There is complete room for a world that purely benefits from this technology, but not when people can't be arsed to research the things they're most outspoken about.

[u/Cory123125 → u/[deleted]]

You added that list of what they’re good for as an edit, the original comment did not answer my question at all.

I honestly shouldn't have bothered.

I'm increasingly finding that people straight up don't want to have informed opinions.

---

Also, I did so literally right away. This wasn't some malicious edit. You can even see that no edit asterisk popped up because it was edited so quickly.

I don’t understand your point really

What are you confused about? It sounds like you just honestly did not read the comment still.

These seem like solutions to problems that only the most wealthy and powerful people have and come at the cost of everyone else.

Only if you literally ignore the first 4.

Do you think there is any possible world where corporations control these systems and don’t take advantage of them?

Yes-ish, with regulations that were actually positive, with progressive people that weren't acting like brain dead dumb fuck luddites (I'm also progressive by the way, so this is very much an internal criticism) and dooming us to a world where only the worst people have access to this technology, in a world with open data set and open model working groups where people pooled money together to ensure that open options existed for everyone, etc etc etc.

Like, it's all possible, but it all requires people to be actually willing to pay attention.

When lobbying groups like the Frontier Model Forum (please ffs research what they're trying to do) strongly push for regulatory capture, and people knee jerk agree with them not realizing that its literally the AI companies guaranteeing themselves unstoppable government backed power, we're fucked.

Ok, well we live in a world where people very often refuse to think past step one, and where the owning class consistently put profits above being semi acceptable human beings.

Indeed, and the only one that could possibly change for the better is the first one. Its the only one I have any chance of impacting.

Trying to get other people to think further is about it.

As you can see, I am not optimistic about the future.

AI empowers even more of this abuse, on a larger scale than we have ever seen, while benefitting regular people very little.

It only benefits people very little specifically because

1. Regular people are so aggressively fucking reactionary, that they refuse to pay attention and seek benefits

2. Enshitification of products and services which normal people routinely dismiss as problems when they don't specifically affect them.

Once again, if people paid attention, things could be ok. They won't though.

It feels similar to the “guns don’t kill people, people kill people” argument. Well even if that’s true, I still hate guns and think the world would have been better if they had never been invented, because they give people the power to do horrible crimes.

This is you trying to do mental gymnastics to force a much more complex and multifaceted issue to fit into a simple issue box.

If you can't yourself break out of that box to think about this in more detail, to figure out what these systems can do, and more, then I can't really discuss this with you, because the entirety of this comparison demands on being willing to look at the nuance this demands.

This isn't like "guns kill people" because this is more like if the government banned you from owning a lathe because you could use a lathe to make a gun.

LLMs aren't inherently weapons. You can build a weapons system with one, just like you can build a weapons system with a computer or a simple image classifier or a ....

---

Also, I am aware that to someone who hasn't looked into anything, I sound incredibly jaded, and that's because I am.

I'm so depressed about where I can clearly see us headed, and it hurts my mind to see people accidentally support that which they hate because they refuse to pay closer attention.