• chloroken@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    1 day ago

    Yes, fuckstick. That’s the whole point to a lot of people.

    I swear, the level of smugness of AI true believers is totally inappropriate.

    • potustheplant@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Also, are we forgetting that AI models were trained by stealing from a fuckton of people? How are folks ok with this? Why is the discussion solely about how well the models work? Where is everyone’s moral compass? And why would they defend a tool explicitly built to replace them? Not to mention how inefficient it is (energy and money-wise).

    • ghost_laptop@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 day ago

      we’ll be waiting in the grown ups room while you figure out how to answer the question “why?”

      • Cyanova@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Why is it that every single time you see someone trying to claim the role of ‘adult in the room’, they appear to be speaking from a perspective of being perfectly oblivious (albeit sometimes for the purpose of obfuscation)?

        Even if you disagree with them, people who oppose LLM usage for ethical reasons still exist for example.

        You aren’t making yourself seem above it as you would like, you are making yourself look unable to intellectually engage with the concept.

        • Auli@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 hours ago

          What I find funny do the people who oppose llms for ethical.reasons also oppose every other tech they use for ethical reasons.

        • alottafagina@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          1 day ago

          Why is it that every single time you see someone trying to claim the role of ‘adult in the room’, they appear to be speaking from a perspective of being perfectly oblivious (albeit sometimes for the purpose of obfuscation)?

          Did you miss the part where OP’s entire argument was ‘fuckstick’?

          Yes, fuckstick. That’s the whole point to a lot of people. I swear, the level of smugness of AI true believers is totally inappropriate.

            • alottafagina@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              24 hours ago

              Sure, but if ‘fuckstick’ is your sole ‘argument’, you can’t exactly call foul when someone declines to engage with you for being childish.

              • potustheplant@feddit.nl
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                23 hours ago

                Well, they were being truthful and children tend to be exceedingly honest. So yes, it was childish, in a way.

                • alottafagina@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  23 hours ago

                  Children don’t typically express honesty with ‘fuckstick’. ‘Childish’ here is used to refer to the absence of capacity or ability to engage in constructive discussion. But feel free to keep painting ‘fuckstick’ in any shade you like. I personally prefer ‘Yo mama’ jokes when I lack the ability to win a particular argument.

          • Cyanova@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 day ago

            Sure, but calling people fuckstick isn’t used on a large scale to shut down conversation, there is a qualitative difference here.

            Edit: I belatedly see your point that it could have been directly in response to that, in which case the pattern recognition was misfiring and I apologise.

            • alottafagina@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              1 day ago

              Sure, but calling people fuckstick isn’t used on a large scale to shut down conversation, there is a qualitative difference here.

              Maybe if ‘fuckstick’ was followed by a coherent argument. But instead of providing one, OP just continues to throw insults about their reasonable perspective somehow being ‘smug’ in some way. I’d call that childish too.

        • ghost_laptop@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          1 day ago

          the discussion of ethics is irrelevant as long as we live in capitalism. there’s not ethical consumption under capitalism, using ai is no different from eating chocolate or drinking coffee. you’d be surprised by the amount of slave labour that’s used today. now, if you oppose because of technological limitations, such as water/energy consumption, this is a very different topic and it’s not an ethical one, which to be honest is not even a very valid argument since it has been solved by open local models. then you might have an issue with the corporations behind some models, but that’s not an issue with “AI”. i also dislike the west, but to be AI is not israelgpt.

            • ghost_laptop@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              11 hours ago

              no, that would be me if i’d say we can’t move away from capitalism. i am a marxist leninist, i am very much in favour of ending this shit your people have imposed on the rest of mankind. the argument here is use or not use ai for ethical reason, this is what i oppose. it’s not ethical, it’s reactionary and it doesn’t produce a better outcome. i am in favour of a more ethical ai. this implies open local models, not using western models, and regulation and standardization.

          • crandall@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            1 day ago

            “Everything is unethical therefore I don’t have to make ethical choices” is bad logic and morally wrong

            • ghost_laptop@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              1 day ago

              you don’t understand how ethics works under capitalism. you didn’t understand what i said. my point is that arguing for ethical consumption, which is the argument you’re using, is a flase argument because it doesn’t exist. if you want to address some of the other issues, there are possibilities for ethical change, tho!

          • Cyanova@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            I don’t need you to tell me any of this, much less in such a condescending way, I am perfectly aware of how the world works. It does, however, amount to a rhetorical sidestep, and I know how it goes from here. Have a good one.