JohnMar 6

RE: https://mastodon.online/@danirabbit/116177355415142125

I think this is an honest but excessive take. Using a derogatory term to refer to LLMs doesn’t mean anything that she says it does. It just doesn’t. I could easily write a thousand words on why LLMs are bad but would and have used the term ‘clanker’ in the past (in the context of ‘no clankers’ to indicate that LLM supplied responses are not welcome). The idea that this makes me akin to a Reform voter is so absurd that it’s bordering on offensive.

Show threadJohnMar 6

And to be clear, this isn’t a ‘not all men’ response - I just don’t agree that the use of ‘clanker’ implies the things she’s saying *for almost everyone*. For sure, there’s always someone, but I just don’t see what she’s describing.

I’m reminded that the origin of ‘social justice warrior’, before it was co-opted by the far right, was from leftist social justice circles to describe someone who took it too far, decrying injustices that just didn’t exist.

Show threadiain (absolute midlife crisis)Mar 6
@semanticist there was a little while shortly after the term started getting popular that the white supremacists really enjoyed making e.g. videos re-enacting real world racist events, just with robot-focused versions of real world slurs. I can understand why people are now averse to it and similar terms.
Show threadJohnMar 6
@ibroadfo_ebooks Huh, that context wasn’t in their posts at all, and it’s definitely not inherent to the usage of the term. I still think it’s a reasonable way to dismissively refer to LLMs. Just because some nazis wanted to make it about their pet hate doesn’t write it off forever. Context matters, and unlike, say, the n word there is no context where ‘clanker’ has caused pain to actual people, so a blanket ‘everyone using this is a racist’ is just a nonsense.
Show threadbroonieMar 8
@semanticist @ibroadfo_ebooks It was a bit more than that - I saw several people expressing discomfort with the enthusiasm with which people had jumped on this particular term that has a certain linguistic overlap with other slurs over other things that have been thrown out there.
Show threadJohnMar 8
@broonie I mean, the person whose post started this certainly feels that way as do the people posting agreeing with her, but I still feel like it’s a hell of a stretch and absolutely in no way implies people using the term are secret racists who are dying to use racist slurs and blame immigrants for the economy. Normally I would say listen to people who are offended by things, but maybe it needs an implied ‘that affects/is targeted at them’? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ I dunno!
Show threadbroonie
@semanticist that was definitely a *super* strong version of it, the more common version I saw was that enough people were weird about that one specific term that it set people who are more directly affected on edge when they heard it - not that everyone is being a problem, but enough people are for it to be a red flag.
Mar 8 at 11:07pmIvory for iOS
Show threadJohnMar 8
@broonie That person's posts were the first I've encountered any kind of push back against it, and it wasn't the most convincing argument - it wasn't even really an argument, just statements. As far as I've been aware, it's just people using a term from Clone Wars, which as a Star Wars fan was amusing to me. But I do make efforts to avoid reading stuff written by right wing nutters and racists, so that might be a factor.
Show threadbroonieMar 8
@semanticist There was a bit of discussion at the time the term came into use (like you say from Star Wars), mostly from people more likely to see the bad stuff directly.