I’ve stopped trying to debate software developers on LLMs. It’s a fruitless debate. Even if the believers in agents and copilots could be budged on empirical grounds, and the past few years have given us plenty of evidence that they can’t, this is still a crowd that is explicitly fine with using tools that are themselves deeply unethical. […]
Somebody who is capable of looking past “ICE is using LLMs as accountability sinks for waving extremists through their recruitment processes”, generated abuse, or how chatbot-mediated alienation seems to be pushing vulnerable people into psychosis-like symptoms, won’t be persuaded by a meaningful study. Their goal is to maintain their personal benefit, as they see it, and all they are doing is attempting to negotiate with you what the level of abuse is that you find acceptable. Preventing abuse is not on their agenda.
You lost them right at the outset. […]
Nor do they seem to care, except in a performative way, that “AI” is designed to be an outright attack on labour and education, using the works of those being attacked – without their consent – as the tools for dismantling their own communities and industries, all done in overt collaboration with the ultra right. […]
Going all “but it works great for me” even as the industry burns around you and the “it” is a right-wing political project built on disregarding consent, being applied to dismantle public infrastructure and institutions, is fundamentally a dick move.
And debating dicks is pointless.
Previously, previously, previously, previously, previously, previously, previously, previously.
From jwz via this RSS feed