Once more for the people at the back.
There is no ethical use of LLMs.
Once more for the people at the back.
There is no ethical use of LLMs.
- simping for "AI" capitalists
- no
- attention by use of trope, underlining the repetition, reinforcement that it's a message everyone needs to hear
- yes
- yes
- yes
What purpose does your response serve?
Is it a good purpose?
Here's a few things for the reader of the original post to think about:
What purpose does the first line serve
Is it a good purpose
Is the second line an absolute statement
Is it correct
@sanfierro @JetlagJen 🙄 🤡 TLDR
@dalias @JetlagJen The purpose is to encourage the reader of the OP to think of a few things, as stated. Jen has provided a thought train, ending up with questions about my own post. Here's another example thought train:
- persuading people to think "Oh, I'm not people at the back, I'm not uninformed, I'm informed (now)" and to adopt what follows as a widely recognized fact as opposed to an opinion
- maybe it's a good purpose given the state of affairs around Gen AI and LLMs, but maybe we need less of that on social media (e.g. instead use "I think" or even "Important to hear", because it doesn't refer to anyone in any particular way (like "people at the back") and thus tries its best to not be manipulative or divisive)
- as given, it's an absolute statement, let's hope the author didn't actually mean it absolutely
- no, unless it's not absolute, then depends on what the author meant, and as absolute as it's given, such stand may lead us to miss out on possible good and ethical use cases, like any talk about searching for or even finding new non-exploitative non-snake oil use cases being automatically dismissed (e.g. considered simping for "AI" capitalists or something else depending on whatever way to dismiss fits best), oh, and similar applies to blockchain and crypto ("oh, look, so many bad uses, there must be no good use possible, let's not ever think of people with good intentions researching into more democratic ways to handle money and other areas, they're all scammers" kind of thinking)
Of course, don't take the above as the only correct or the best, it's just an example, after all the purpose is to encourage critical thinking. So, yeah, my response doesn't serve the purpose Cassandrich mentioned (I don't judge you for that). I think the purpose of my response is good
GNU social JP is a social network, courtesy of GNU social JP管理人. It runs on GNU social, version 2.0.2-dev, available under the GNU Affero General Public License.
All GNU social JP content and data are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license.