this post was submitted on 09 Aug 2025
171 points (83.3% liked)
Privacy
40710 readers
395 users here now
A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.
Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.
In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.
Some Rules
- Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn't great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
- Don't promote proprietary software
- Try to keep things on topic
- If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
- Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
- Be nice :)
Related communities
much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
We've been using 'AI' for quite some time now, well before the advent of AI Rice Cookers. It's really not that new.
I use AI when I master my audio tracks. I am clinically deaf and there are some frequency ranges that I can't hear well enough to master. So I lean heavily on AI. I use AI for explaining unfamiliar code to me. Now, I don't run and implement such code in a production environment. You have to do your due diligence. If you searched for the same info in a search engine, you still have to do your due diligence. Search engine results aren't always authoritative. It's just that Grok is much faster at searching and in fact, lists the sources it pulled the info from. Again, much faster than engaging a search engine and slogging through site after site.
If you want to trade accuracy for speed, that's your prerogative.
AI has its uses. Transcribing subtitles, searching images by description, things like that. But too many times, I've seen AI summaries that, if you read the article the AI cited, it can be flatly wrong on things.
What's the point of a summary that doesn't actually summarize the facts accurately?
Just because I find an inaccurate search result does not mean DDG is useless. Never trust, always verify.
There it is. The bold-faced lie.
"I don't blindly trust AI, I just ask it to summarize something, read the output, then read the source article too. Just to be sure the AI summarized it properly."
Nobody is doing double the work. If you ask AI a question, it only gets a vibe check at best.
Hey there BluescreenOfDeath, sup. Good to meet you. My name is 'Nobody'.
It's easy to post on a forum and say so.
Maybe you even are actually asking AI questions and researching whether or not it's accurate.
Perhaps you really are the world's most perfect person.
But even if that's true, which I very seriously doubt, then you're going to be the extreme minority. People will ask AI a question, and if they like the answers given, they'll look no further. If they don't like the answers given, they'll ask the AI with different wording until they get the answer they want.
You can't practically "trust but verify" with LLMs. I task an LLM to summarize an article. If I want to check its work, I have to go and read that whole article myself. The checking takes as much time as just writing the summary myself. And this is even worse with code, as you have to be able to deconstruct the AI's code and figure out its internal logic. And by the time you've done that, it's easier to just make the code yourself.
It's not that you can't verify the work of AI. It's that if you do, you might as well just create the thing yourself.