RE: https://hci.social/@fasterandworse/116586227741468965

You can't tell the world you use AI for *just this small thing* without contributing to the legitimacy of the whole AI industry.

You also can't use AI for *just this small thing* and think that you won't become the next *just this small thing*.

I won't try to argue the ethical issues of using LLMs — because, as real as they are, when you use it for *just this small thing* you've made your choice.
I don't doubt how useful you believe it is for *just this small thing*, but I do doubt how much you really care about *just this small thing* to accept a product which is incidentally useful instead of recognising that any legitimate purpose deserves a product legitimately designed to satisfy it.

LLMs are not designed for a purpose. They are not designed for a group of related purposes. They are not a product of design.

They are a mechanism of design which is being reactively presented as solutions for whatever purposes seem to have the most revenue potential.

Any product which is not designed for an *anchoring* purpose is doomed to chase revenue how ever it can.

Your *just this small thing* which AI seems helpful for is an accident.

I have much more to say but this is so exhausting
these threads always uncover the same what-aboutisms that don't deserve a response
I've yet to meet a "what about?" that hasn't made me roll my eyes
I do have a few "I dare you" ones I'm ready for
@fasterandworse saw this today, seems appropriate for this moment.
@dave I thought the middle one was a poor likeness of tim cook at first
@dave @fasterandworse if they’re not careful, people will start coming around to the joys of being left behind.

@fasterandworse I think a lot of technology, esp in anglo-capitalist societies, started off harmful and became relatively mundane through regulation and informed use. I say this not out of optimism but pragmatism.

I don't think we should encourage the use LLMs. But in a world where some people are already using them and scoped use cases + alternatives to centralized platforms are emerging, I want to steer as much as possible toward “less bad” if a ban won't happen.

https://zirk.us/@MidniteMikeWrites/116104686552109831

RE: https://zirk.us/@MidniteMikeWrites/116523605682492305

@fasterandworse I recognize the point you're making. LLM chatbots rely on affective design for user feedback. They inherently have no scope or affordance that makes them “for” anything.

People, however, are building workflows in scoped domains where users don't externalize their cognition and model outputs can be evaluated by some standard.

In so far as these conditions are met I think future harm can be mitigated. But I understand this doesn't change the ethical/sourcing issue, though.

RE: https://hci.social/@fasterandworse/116602509715514659

...and it is no surprise (or should not be) that the traditionally revenue generating things - surveillance, war, clickbait-y disinformation - are emerging as revenue generating use cases above and beyond any others. The system (and small group of proveably bad people) that created genAI/LLMs/MLs are repeating their dominant patterns of exploitation and harm.

@fasterandworse to be fair, they are designed for a purpose, that is deceive the user and suck from they as much as it can
@fasterandworse i disagree they are designed to establish fashism.
@fasterandworse And LLMs are hardly the best (or even good) at anything. All they produce is mediocre dice-roll text that you take more time editing than doing it yourself entirely..