ok well there was your mistake, you have to talk to a crab

That’s not true! They have to keep sending it back to the kitchen over and over and over, spending a little more money each time, really being in a dialogue with the chef

But you’re not, and anyone with at least two brain cells can see that.

Trump calls “Antifa” a terrorist organization. “Antifa” is not an organization at all. It’s a broad term for people who call themselves anti-fascists, and rigidly police each other’s use of that term.

I want to create a totalitarian regime

Then you’re not antifascist.

I’m not… disagreeing with… that. I… you know what, forget it.

Do you think she knew that at that age? All she said was that the woman was pretty and she wanted to look like her. Even now that she knows I don’t think it’s safe to say she conflates dressing like a hooker with being one, as you seem to.

Silly girl, she forgot to ask for the expiration date! Rookie mistake. She’ll never be able to use that card now, not unless she wants to brute force it.

She didn’t… say she wanted drugs and hookers. The closest thing she said to that was that she wanted to “look like… the town tramp”

That iconic Star Wars beverage that they put in Disneyland because dammit, they had to copy the Avatar experience at Universal Studios somehow

Speaking of which, I’ll take that collar if he doesn’t want it :3

Alright, fair, probably a lot, but I’d wager much less than half, and in my experience you’ll have an extremely hard time finding people who still don’t like LLMs when they’re not being shoved down their throats outside the Fediverse.

deleted by creator

@zd9@lemmy.world responded to this comment:

Nobody who uses AI treats it like a tool, they treat it like an employee they can claim credit for. And most tools aren’t actively detrimental to the user to the point of proven intelligence drops, lawsuits and environmental destruction. Also, the enemy charges you money to use it.

The only person who benefits from AI is the person selling it. So why are you trying to defend it?

with a reply that amounted to “I’m an AI researcher, and you’re wrong about the technology. There are plenty of legitimate uses.”

Which part of the original comment do either you or zd9 disagree with?

Let’s go through it claim by claim.

Nobody who uses AI treats it like a tool, they treat it like an employee they can claim credit for.

This is subjective, so I’ll let you have it, but it’s true in a lot of cases. Vibe coders and AI artists definitely do, and people who use it as a coding assistant arguably do.

most tools aren’t actively detrimental to the user to the point of proven intelligence drops,

https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.08872

lawsuits

I’m not sure what precisely @susaga@sh.itjust.works meant by this, so until they clarify I’ll tentatively say you can have that one too.

and environmental destruction.

Where to begin? Clean air act violating natural gas turbines on xAI datacenters? Houses being claimed under eminent domain to build beefier power lines because they use that much? Water use?

Also, the enemy charges you money to use it.

Unless you’re using a local LLM, this is obviously true.

Again I ask: which part of the comment zd9 replied to was wrong?

I apologize for presenting an insufficiently nuanced view of your favorite toy. It’s not an excuse, but being subjected (and seeing my friends subjected) to the massive material harms done by LLM companies has a tendency to make me very angry, and I lash out at the obvious target. In retrospect, I realize only about 90% of current LLM deployments and use cases fit the both-unethical-and-harmful-to-the-user model I describe, and the remaining 10% is crucial. We mustn’t throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Please do elucidate what exactly these ethical uses of LLMs are.

You mentioned in another thread you use them for research. Have you figured out how to get them to stop confidently presenting incorrect information because they don’t know the difference between a sequence of tokens that represents a true fact and one that doesn’t hallucinating yet?

First of all, I’m not the person you replied to. Second, which part of what they said was wrong?

Most of them are as staunchly anti-AI as I am, and don’t talk about it unless someone else brings it up. Which if you hang out in programming circles, on or offline, happens approximately every five minutes.

I don’t think LLMs are bad because they’re not useful. If people didn’t think they were useful, ChatGPT alone wouldn’t have 900 million weekly users.

I think LLMs are bad because they buy up all the computer parts and leave none for the rest of us to build datacenters that make their communities worse places to live, and consume so much electricity that houses have to be bulldozed to build bigger power lines and/or have clean air act violating natural gas turbines on the property belching toxins into predominantly black neighborhoods, and suck up so much water that there isn’t enough for residents, and scrape independent websites until their servers crash and evade every roadblock webmasters put in their way in the hopes of one additional scrap of training material, and buying and destroying rare books because they need training data that isn’t polluted by LLM slop like the internet is and cutting the spines off of books lets you scan them faster and more cheaply than if you don’t do that, all so that they can produce a machine that generates answers that are wrong 10% of the time, meaning that you have to check them anyway, and code that its authors do not understand and which is extraordinarily difficult to maintain, and make it the expectation to write three bullet points into a chatbot to turn it into a five paragraph email which the person who receives it will then immediately feed back into the same chatbot to turn it into three (slightly different) bullet points. and measurably hinder children’s learning. and that’s without going into chatbot psychosis and suicides, which we prommy are rare and caused by preexisting conditions.

But they’re also useful for generating meal plans or whatever, so all in it’s even.

If people who didn’t know/didn’t care about all the ethical issues with ChatGPT didn’t find it useful, it wouldn’t have 900 million weekly users.

Obviously they’re useful. They still shouldn’t be used. Both because they do a bad job that is difficult for their users to see as bad, and because they’re 17 different kinds of unethical.

The people that treat it like a tool don’t go around telling everyone about it.

What rock have you been under? None of the people in my social circles who use AI as a tool will shut up about it.

You know that when people who complain about AI say “AI”, they mean diffusion models and LLMs, not the field of machine learning as a whole.

Are you defending those too? If not, why did you enter this conversation?