If you’ve watched any Olympics coverage this week, you’ve likely been confronted with an ad for Google’s Gemini AI called “Dear Sydney.” In it, a proud father seeks help writing a letter on behalf of his daughter, who is an aspiring runner and superfan of world-record-holding hurdler Sydney McLaughlin-Levrone.

“I’m pretty good with words, but this has to be just right,” the father intones before asking Gemini to “Help my daughter write a letter telling Sydney how inspiring she is…” Gemini dutifully responds with a draft letter in which the LLM tells the runner, on behalf of the daughter, that she wants to be “just like you.”

I think the most offensive thing about the ad is what it implies about the kinds of human tasks Google sees AI replacing. Rather than using LLMs to automate tedious busywork or difficult research questions, “Dear Sydney” presents a world where Gemini can help us offload a heartwarming shared moment of connection with our children.

Inserting Gemini into a child’s heartfelt request for parental help makes it seem like the parent in question is offloading their responsibilities to a computer in the coldest, most sterile way possible. More than that, it comes across as an attempt to avoid an opportunity to bond with a child over a shared interest in a creative way.

  • iAvicenna@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Being a non native English speaker this is actually one of the better uses of LLMs for me. When I need to write in “fancier” English I ask LLMs and use it as an initial point (sometimes end up doing heavy modifications sometimes light). I mean this is one of the more logical uses of LLM, it is good at languages (unlike trying to get it to solve math problems).

    And I dont agree with the pov that just because you use LLM output to find a good starting point it stops being personal.

    • Emmie@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      The problem with this is that effectively you aren’t speaking anymore, the bot does for you. And if on the other side someone does not read anymore (the bot does it for them) then we are in very bizarre situation where all sorts of crazy shit starts to happen that never did.
      You will ‚say’ something you didn’t mean at all, they will ‚read’ something that wasn’t there. The very language, communication collapses.

      If everyone relies on it this will lead to total paralysis of society because the tool is flawed but in such a way that is not immediately apparent until it is everywhere, processes its own output and chokes on the garbage it produces.

      It wouldn’t be so bad if it was immediately apparent but it seems so helpful and nice what can go wrong

    • Eximius@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Well, if you get anywhere with that fake facade, then it will catch up to you.

      Better start reading nicely written English books while doing this…

      • EatATaco@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Learning to use the tools available to you is not “fake” it’s being smart. Anyone who would be like “oh you recognize your weak point and have found and used a tool effectively to minimize it…you’re fired/get out of my life” is an asshole and an idiot.

        • Eximius@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          If you use binggpt as a translator tool, and put a disclaimer that these are not your own words - kudos, you removed the need for a translator and the latency associated.

          However, if you claim that you speak English and use this tool to create a false impression of proficiency, that is just usual lying.