MxVerda: You control no one but yourself. You can influence our shared environments, however!
" @francescauphigh, 1 day ago:
Friends don't let friends use generative AI ๐๐
@nighthiker, 18 hours ago:
Friends educate friends, don't alienate them. ;)
@silliestofwiggles, 17 hours ago:
@nighthiker
francescauphigh's comment wasn't alienating, it was pointing out that most people in solid friendship circles with valid ethical, moral and environmental concerns about AI usage are staying tight knit and raising those concerns with friends. if you find this alienating, that may be a sign that you're taking critique of AI too personally.
something to reflect on, but I personally never felt alienated by anyone telling me something I was engaging in was harmful, dangerous or concerning.
when you respect the people that give you that information, it's easy to take it into consideration without taking it personally.
@nighthiker, 16 hours ago (edited) :
@silliestofwiggles
Such loaded language, don't you think? You seem to imply that only people who do not have valid ethical, moral and environmental concerns use LLMs.
If you don't understand how that is alienating, then maybe you're taking my critique of such position too personaly? ;)
There are many legitimate reasons for people to decide to use LLMs, even after taking all those things into consideration. And it's not always that even the most "tightly knit" group can provide what that one person needs. There are a myriad of systemic failures in our society that may lead someone to use LLMs to mitigate such failures. Peer pressure won't solve the systemic issues - at best those people will continue their use, but hide it from you.
Also, there is no such thing as truly ethical consumption in our corrupt, decadent late stage capitalistic society. I don't think everyone who says it's immoral to use LLMs is a vegan who never consumes anything that is not made by local providers, never bought anything made using exploited labor, never used social media platforms like this one where we're having this conversation, and so on. ;)
When I say "educate, not alienate", I include passing judgement from a position of convenience. Feel free to mention your reservations, but it's not your place to "let" people do or not do anything.
@silliestofwiggles, 13 hours ago:
@nighthiker
I do take enormous, disastrous harm to the environment, which is where I live, extremely personally, yeah
@Barbara-li5yb, 3 hours ago:
@nighthiker
I am a former coder (from the โ80โs). The first time I saw a similar sentence the topic wasnโt about AI but about the Microsoft operating system. It was similarly online in a comment thread, but a few other writers were also coders. The difference was I had been retired for ages and they were all still in the business.
That one comment led to a fascinating and informative discussion where I learned enough to stay interested in learning what had happened in the industry after I retired.
At no time did I see it as serious, or a threat that one of them would physically take my computer away or change the login password or something.
I see us at a similar point in time when discussing AI. The only time that sentence would encompass actual control over the โfriendโ is when the two people know each other IRL in a pretty intimate way IMO.
@nighthiker, 1 hour ago:
@Barbara-li5yb
It doesn't need to be "serious". Peer pressure and shaming can be insidious even when things are said in a tongue in cheek manner. Maybe Francesca didn't MEAN for it to be serious - I find it very well possible - and even feel a bit uncomfortable for maybe having hijacked the thread if so, but I also think it's an important conversation - just look at this comment section and many others around the subject. There is a lot of shaming of end users going on. There's an incentive for behaving like that in progressive echo chambers, due to the very AI like algorithms which manipulate our attention - and it benefits no one besides the very same tech bros people hate so much (and I'm one of those who hate them). They don't care if you say good or bad things about AI online, as long as there's engagement, data to be mined and little to no real systemic change.
Focusing on the end users is a distraction. We need to pressure people in power for better AI governance and guardrails. Fortunately some of that has been happening, but it's still too timid. We need to tax the hell out of billionaires and automated labor and use the funds to implement better social safety nets for workers. An average end user's year long environmental footprint is actually very small - about the same as that of a meat based diet for a month or so (yes, LLM usage accounts to much less environmental damage than having a meat based diet, for example). The really resource intensive stuff happens in research and the training of the models, as well as in corporate spheres, and neither those responsible for the guardrails nor the heavy users are hanging around in these comments sections.
So I hoped my "intervention", so to speak, would at least reach a few of those reading these lines and maybe lead to some of that fascinating and informative discussion you alluded to. The jury is still out, it seems... "
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yf3hkq4WZKM
Alex 
Mx Verda
Flipturns ๐โโ๏ธ ๐ท ๐ฆ
Droppie [opensoc]
Ancient Origins
Jasmine Mangalaseril ๐ง
Seth Chagi
Matt Willemsen