|
Top-level
 Maybe this needs to be called "voice recognition" instead of AI? Using a term that nowadays means something awful is going to make misunderstandings more likely? (When I read the news about VLC using AI I wrongly assumed it meant generative AI, as that has totally dominated discourse.) 6 comments
 @SamiMaatta @FediThing @bedast In the case of automatic transcription, itβs using machine-learning models, which are similar enough to LLMs that it muddies the water, as far as terminology goes. Whatever it's called, perhaps it needs to get across the ethics of its technology if it wants to avoid misunderstandings? If it's using massive amounts of energy and/or stolen data for training, then it's probably unethical. If it's using reasonable amounts of energy and hasn't stolen any data, then it might be ethical. (I think? Just a layperson here, might be a lot of stuff I'm missing...) @SamiMaatta @FediThing @bedast And so every developer or group with a sense of marketing should have started avoiding the word for like a year now.  @SamiMaatta@mementomori.social @FediThing@social.chinwag.org @bedast@beige.party Isn't VLC doing the same, though? It doesn't seem like there's much "intelligence" going on when all you're doing is voice recognition, so why refer to it as a form of "intelligence"? Maybe everyone should stop trying to create hype by calling any new feature "AI".  @SamiMaatta @FediThing @bedast the term "AI" never HAD any real meaning; it has always been a marketing buzzword used to bedazzle people who don't know better. reading on the history of "AI" can be enlightening. |
Gregory's Server
@FediThing @bedast One of GenAI's well poisoning aspects has been tarnishing the term "AI". It has lost its meaning now.