I’m not going to criticize folks who refuse to use genAI because of the exploitative labor conditions. Like your moral red lines are yours.

But saying other people are evil or fools for not doing so just makes you look ignorant. The technology isn’t why people are being exploited and there is almost nothing you use or enjoy that doesn’t have unbearable depths of human suffering associated with its production. That’s not inevitable, but it’s also not because it’s an llm, or food, or a book, or a soft tshirt, or your air conditioner, or a comfortable chair. Foregoing those things won’t make a damn bit of difference to anything and acting like it will distracts from the actual fight we should be having.

@sus Out of curiosity, did you read the NOEMA article?
@wohali no, what noema article?
🔮 oracle of dylphi :crumb_dancing: 🇬🇾 (@kalviter)

CW: cory doctorow

holograph
@sus yeah the "no ethical consumption under capitalism" aspect has always tied me in knots. So many things are true at the same time it gets hard to add anything that hasn't been said (true were super inconsistent drawing our red lines, true that people point this out in bad faith to support status quo, etc etc). How do you nurture broad coalitions with so many ethical hot buttons?

What I get from "no ethical consumption under capitalism" is an ethical duty to minimize consumption (or minimize capitalism! also acceptable!)

But

There's more than one minimum on this manifold!

time for some gradient descent?

@takeoutweight @sus

@sus

Ah yeah, the old myth of "personal responsibility" and "ethical consumption"... which was pushed by destructive industries (initially plastic, I think) to avoid regulation and scrutiny.