refusing to use LLMs: not purity culture

@0xabad1dea had to be said.

@0xabad1dea I just want to disenfranchise and dehumanise *LLMS*... and maybe disenfranchise (but not dehumanise) the fat cats that made them and inflicted them on the world. Lies and especially theft at that scale is a crime against humanity. ...

@0xabad1dea LLMs can be genuinely useful sometimes, mainly because all search engines have become nothing but SEO garbage where most of the top results don't actually answer your question. you do need to be able to question if the information is actually correct though. it's also usually not worth accelerating the death of the planet for, but i guess that's just something we gotta deal with so billionaires can keep their investors happy (god i hate society)

@0xabad1dea Yeah I can’t stand LLMs and don’t use them but a lot of antis have a real religious fervour to them that’s very offputting

@0xabad1dea I see this mentioned all around fedi, but nobody cares to mention who this is about. So, who is this about?

@Razemix I honestly don’t know who originally said the thing, I’m responding to the discourse among the antis, not the pros

@0xabad1dea Yeah. Many people are practically forced to use LLMs by employers nowadays, and putting blames to them really is jerk move.

And I won't blame most people who voluntarily uses LLM either, including those who sent me slops and waste my time. I don't think I can blame a systematic problem on individuals who just tries to survive

wait why is doing a terrorism supposed to be bad?

#joking-due-to-instance-rules

@0xabad1dea Related: there is a Chinese idioms called "严以律己，宽以待人" (hold strict standards to yourself but be forgiving to others)

@0xabad1dea this needed saying. I think it is going to continue to need saying for a while unfortunately

@mjdxp @0xabad1dea "we broke a good thing and then made a worse thing that's only ~maybe~ better than the thing we left broken because we broke it" really sucks and it's *so much of tech* right now

@0xabad1dea @Razemix cory doctorow wrote in his anniversary blog post that disowning LLMs as a technology is similar to "neoliberal purity culture"

@mjdxp @0xabad1dea SEO garbage is a real problem, but I don't think something that is capable of making up plausible sounding text, that is disconnected from reality, is the best solution.

I'd much prefer something that only ever surfaced text that has a known, live source I can check, both to be sure it is actually there, and to check the surrounding context.

Feels like LLMs are crowding out better solutions to some problems.

@morganist @0xabad1dea Oh, wow… Thanks for the context.

@0xabad1dea if yelling at idiots who legitimize slop machines is purity culture so be it i won’t stop doing it

@quantumsys @0xabad1dea what word should i use that’s not ableist or saneist? to call slop advocates fash wouldn’t be quite right

and you’d need to clarify how exactly “shaming working class consumers” relates to my point

@quantumsys @0xabad1dea look sometimes beings are too far gone for me to bother engaging in good faith and arguing the same points over and over again when i know it won’t go anywhere. my energy for doing that is finite. so in such cases my response to [insert non-saneist word here]s doing apologism for fash is going to lack any kindness, and i think that’s quite reasonable. when i know i can’t inspire change in them, i can at least yell a little to give myself and those on my side of the discourse an affirmation.

@quantumsys @0xabad1dea

OP feels like it’s implying a general claim that calling people out on using unethical tech is wrong, which is a bad and annoying albeit frequent take, might’ve misinterpreted that

@0xabad1dea

> one missed coffee from doing a terrorism

I know this was intended as a bad thing but mind of want this on a t-shirt (in jest)