• korazail@lemmy.myserv.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Like many things, a tool is only as smart as the wielder. There’s still a ton of critical thinking that needs to happen as you do something as simple as bake bread. Using an AI tool to suggest ingredients can be useful from a creative perspective, but should not be assumed accurate at face value. Raisins and Dill? maybe ¯\(ツ)/¯, haven’t tried that one myself.

    I like AI, for being able to add detail to things or act as a muse, but it cannot be trusted for anything important. This is why I’m ‘anti-AI’. Too many people (especially in leadership roles) see this tool as a solution for replacing expensive humans with something that ‘does the thinking’; but as we’ve seen elsewhere in this thread, AI CANT THINK. It only suggests items that are statistically likely to be next/near based on its input.

    In the Security Operations space, we have a phrase “trust but verify”. For anything AI, I would use 'doubt, then verify" instead. That all said. AI might very well give you a pointer to the place to ask how much motrin an infant should get. Hopefully, that’s your local pediatrician.

    • Angelusz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Fairly based. If you verify the output by visiting trusted medical sites, you won’t need a doctor for many things. Learn to do it on your own, become a medic. You have a kid, don’t rely on others for its survival. Only in emergency should a professional be needed.

      There, nuance.