tanteFeb 20

Yesterday Cory Doctorow argued that refusal to use LLMs was mere "neoliberal purity culture". I think his argument is a strawman, doesn't align with his own actions and delegitimizes important political actions we need to make in order to build a better cyberphysical world.

EDIT: Diskussions under this are fine, but I do not want this to turn into an ad hominem attack to Cory. Be fucking respectful

https://tante.cc/2026/02/20/acting-ethical-in-an-imperfect-world/

Acting ethically in an imperfect world

Life is complicated. Regardless of what your beliefs or politics or ethics are, the way that we set up our society and economy will often force you to act against them: You might not want to fly somewhere but your employer will not accept another mode of transportation, you want to eat vegan but are […]

Smashing Frames
Show threadCory DoctorowFeb 20
@tante Dunno where you got the idea that I have a "libertarian" background. I was raised by Trotskyists, am a member of the DSA, am advising and have endorsed Avi Lewis, and joined the UK Greens to back Polanski.
Show threadR.L. LEFeb 20
@pluralistic @tante My impression was, Tante meant this specific argument and the way it is structured, and the way it functions. I hold the both of you in high esteem, and I don't have the impression that he'd somehow characterize anything beyond that argument he discusses.
Show threadCory DoctorowFeb 20

@herrLorenz @tante

> Cory shows his libertarian leanings here...

> Many people criticizing LLMs come from a somewhat leftist (in contrast to Cory’s libertarian) background.

Show threadCJPaloma might be hikingFeb 20

@pluralistic @herrLorenz @tante that second example goes well into overreach territory, and I can see why you'd be not happy with it.

And/but a big part of libertarian appeal is that it does muddy how being "individually free from regulation" can be cast as liberatory. As if individual freedom is all that's needed. "I'm free when there are no regulations" is obviously shallow to lefties, but it (individual freedom) is also a component of why people are lefties, there's real overlap.

Show threadCory Doctorow

@CJPaloma @herrLorenz @tante

There is no virtue in being constrained or regulated per se.

Regulation isn't a good unto itself.

Regulation that is itself good - drawn up for a good purpose, designed to be administrable, and then competently administered - is good.

Feb 20 at 1:50pmWeb
Show threadCJPaloma might be hikingFeb 20

@pluralistic @herrLorenz @tante Of course! Agreed.

The overlap ends around -when- reasons are "good" enough. Laws about how to treat other people are relatively easy.

But until enough people see rivers on fire, regulations on -doing certain things- aren't imposed, despite many people saying "hey, this isn't good" decades prior.

Not reining in/regulating until after -foreseeable- catastrophes results in all kinds of shit shows (from the MIC, to urban sprawl, to plastics, to tax laws, etc)