Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Christine Lemmer-Webber 🌀 (cwebber@social.coop)'s status on Thursday, 08-May-2025 19:19:28 JST Christine Lemmer-Webber 🌀

   when I find out someone's been using an AI assistant to compose replies to me they drop to the bottom of the queue of people I will talk to

   I don't need someone to disrespect me like that. use words you mean

   • Embed this notice
     Christine Lemmer-Webber 🌀 (cwebber@social.coop)'s status on Thursday, 08-May-2025 19:22:50 JST Christine Lemmer-Webber 🌀

     in reply to

     I already get enough information. I get too much information. Too many words.

     I don't need more words. I need meaningful words, words that matter to me.

     Don't waste my time, don't waste others' time. Say what *you* mean when you talk to someone.

   • Embed this notice
     Christine Lemmer-Webber 🌀 (cwebber@social.coop)'s status on Thursday, 08-May-2025 19:23:15 JST Christine Lemmer-Webber 🌀

     in reply to

     If you're using it to translate things you've written, that's different. That one's ok.

   • Embed this notice
     Paco Hope #resist (paco@infosec.exchange)'s status on Thursday, 08-May-2025 19:53:52 JST Paco Hope #resist

     in reply to

     @cwebber I’ve adopted a principle at work when people want to show me something they produced using an LLM: I will not be the first to read the output. If you used an LLM to produce something, have you read it and decided it’s good enough to share with me? If you can’t be arsed to read it, I can’t either.

     It is shocking the number of people who take LLM output, copy/paste it, and don’t read it.

   • Embed this notice
     Christine Lemmer-Webber 🌀 (cwebber@social.coop)'s status on Thursday, 08-May-2025 20:26:11 JST Christine Lemmer-Webber 🌀

     in reply to

     I got a really strange reply on Bluesky, and I think it's worth quoting, because it's worth refuting:

     > one of the biggest problems in human communication is that people (without assistance) say things they do not mean. it's one of the primary forms of miscommunication out there. AI assistants can, actually, help ensure people _do_ say what they mean, while also anticipating how others may take it.

     https://bsky.app/profile/alyruffruff.bsky.social/post/3lonpe4tdkk22

     (cotd)

   • Embed this notice
     Christine Lemmer-Webber 🌀 (cwebber@social.coop)'s status on Thursday, 08-May-2025 20:26:44 JST Christine Lemmer-Webber 🌀

     in reply to

     Strange reply about AI, continued:

     > in this sense what people do with LLMs is not meaningfully different from translation, in fact it is all translation between idiolects and sociolects, colloquial dialects and prestige dialects. there's no linguistically sound distinction between these forms of translation.

     https://bsky.app/profile/alyruffruff.bsky.social/post/3lonpe547qc22

     (ok, now to refute it)

   • Embed this notice
     Christine Lemmer-Webber 🌀 (cwebber@social.coop)'s status on Thursday, 08-May-2025 20:28:21 JST Christine Lemmer-Webber 🌀

     in reply to

     My reply:

     The AI doesn't have access to your internal thoughts to translate from.

     If I ask an AI to translate a book, but I keep the book closed, and it can only look at the cover, it can't translate it unless it already knows its contents.

     It can guess, but that's not the same.

     https://bsky.app/profile/dustyweb.bsky.social/post/3lonsg4gxps2k

   • Embed this notice
     Christine Lemmer-Webber 🌀 (cwebber@social.coop)'s status on Thursday, 08-May-2025 20:30:03 JST Christine Lemmer-Webber 🌀

     in reply to

     So, it's true that communication is largely, even primarily, translation between different mediums of information. Even your thoughts to the words from your mouth is translation.

     But it's fully strange to say that AI generating thoughts "for you" is "translation" from a source material you cannot examine.

     This is like the weird thing of an "AI representation of a deceased defendant" appearing in court.

     What absolute, dangerous nonsense. Complete misunderstanding of life, ideas, communication.

   • Embed this notice
     Christine Lemmer-Webber 🌀 (cwebber@social.coop)'s status on Thursday, 08-May-2025 20:34:04 JST Christine Lemmer-Webber 🌀

     in reply to

     I removed the links to the post because the original poster felt it was dogpiling for me to do so, and fair enough I guess.

     But I am troubled by this line of thinking, and I think it *is* a line of thinking people are going down.

   • Embed this notice
     Christine Lemmer-Webber 🌀 (cwebber@social.coop)'s status on Thursday, 08-May-2025 21:09:52 JST Christine Lemmer-Webber 🌀

     in reply to

     • infinite love ⴳ

     @trwnh I boost my own replies so you see it twice because then it means the reply is double good

   • Embed this notice
     infinite love ⴳ (trwnh@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 08-May-2025 21:09:53 JST infinite love ⴳ

     in reply to

     @cwebber unrelated to the thread but somewhat related to what that person was saying: is there a reason why you boost your own self-replies? i think the overwhelming majority of fedi apps will show self-replies in timelines, so boosting yourself just makes your posts show up twice in a row, which is unnecessary. (i can understand doing it on bluesky, because bluesky collapses reply chains to max 3 or so, but fedi largely doesn't do that...)

     Christine Lemmer-Webber 🌀 repeated this.