I appreciated this article by @mttaggart
infosec.exchange.

I get the temptation especially in this world we're all living in where you have to produce something super fast all the time.

But my question is, what are people's arguments for how functioning software can be created with these tools?

What about new architectures, new ways of thinking, new programming languages, etc? Who will create those?

https://taggart-tech.com/reckoning/

@timnitGebru that blogpost strikes me as incredibly irresponsible

The legalistic use of the word "works" - the post itself includes the keyphrase "works with caveats"! - and that otherwise reasonable conclusion that becomes absolutely heinous anywhere that isn't a vacuum. Suggesting people need to be more accommodating towards LLM users is a joke when this is the cohort attempting to force their (by the authors' recognition horrifically joyless to use) toys onto and into everyone else's life.

@timnitGebru In a perfect world I'd accept people that love their codegen chatbots as no different from people that prefer the command line or tabs over spaces!

But we're not in that world and they're actively forcing their products on everyone else and posts like these reek of someone that has the privilege of not having that be done to them.

@timnitGebru There's something especially heinous about using the word "works" like this despite knowing all of the issues and I feel like it's been litigated to death at this point and people should know better by now.

Leaded gasoline "works". Downtown freeways "work". Asbestos "works". The list goes on. It's tiresome! It's irksome! It strikes me as if this author thought the theft machine wasn't capable of reproducing the working content it stole! Yes! That's why we call it a theft machine!