Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Cyborg)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

CIRCLE WITH A DOT

  1. Home
  2. Uncategorized
  3. Yesterday Cory Doctorow argued that refusal to use LLMs was mere "neoliberal purity culture".

Yesterday Cory Doctorow argued that refusal to use LLMs was mere "neoliberal purity culture".

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Uncategorized
163 Posts 63 Posters 50 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • colman@mastodon.ieC colman@mastodon.ie

    @FediThing @tante @pluralistic I’ve been utterly baffled why he’s so popular for decades.

    tante@tldr.nettime.orgT This user is from outside of this forum
    tante@tldr.nettime.orgT This user is from outside of this forum
    tante@tldr.nettime.org
    wrote last edited by
    #44

    @Colman @FediThing @pluralistic this is just a dumb attack on Cory as a person which I will not accept. You can talk about what he or I wrote (both things can be criticized) but have some respect

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • simonzerafa@infosec.exchangeS simonzerafa@infosec.exchange

      @raymaccarthy @tante

      Beats me.

      I thought Cory was supposed to be clever or something? I've blocked him for now. Not interested in banging my head against that particular lack of critical thinking.

      Perhaps when the AI bubble bursts, he will become more rational.

      tante@tldr.nettime.orgT This user is from outside of this forum
      tante@tldr.nettime.orgT This user is from outside of this forum
      tante@tldr.nettime.org
      wrote last edited by
      #45

      @simonzerafa @raymaccarthy this is just a dumb attack on Cory as a person which I will not accept. You can talk about what he or I wrote (both things can be criticized) but have some respect

      raymaccarthy@mastodon.ieR 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • tante@tldr.nettime.orgT tante@tldr.nettime.org

        @simonzerafa @raymaccarthy this is just a dumb attack on Cory as a person which I will not accept. You can talk about what he or I wrote (both things can be criticized) but have some respect

        raymaccarthy@mastodon.ieR This user is from outside of this forum
        raymaccarthy@mastodon.ieR This user is from outside of this forum
        raymaccarthy@mastodon.ie
        wrote last edited by
        #46

        @tante @simonzerafa
        A brilliant person isn't right about everything.
        It's only a criticism of one view/idea.

        simonzerafa@infosec.exchangeS 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • pluralistic@mamot.frP pluralistic@mamot.fr

          @simonzerafa @tante

          Checking for punctuation errors is does not discourage critical thinking. It's weird to laud "critical thinking" and also make this claim.

          tante@tldr.nettime.orgT This user is from outside of this forum
          tante@tldr.nettime.orgT This user is from outside of this forum
          tante@tldr.nettime.org
          wrote last edited by
          #47

          @pluralistic @simonzerafa on this one for example I fully agree with Cory. This is not him having a genAI system write or anything like that.

          dhd6@jasette.facil.servicesD 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • pluralistic@mamot.frP pluralistic@mamot.fr

            @FediThing @tante

            Which parts of running a model on your own laptop are implicated in "destroying the planet?" How is checking punctuation "stealing labor?" Or, for that matter "giving power over knowledge to LLM owners?"

            skyfaller@jawns.clubS This user is from outside of this forum
            skyfaller@jawns.clubS This user is from outside of this forum
            skyfaller@jawns.club
            wrote last edited by
            #48

            @pluralistic I think you can answer these questions yourself.

            Suppose you wore a coat made out of mink fur. The minks are already dead, simply wearing the coat won't kill more minks. What does wearing mink fur have to do with cruelty to minks?

            Suppose you live in the time of the Luddites. Legislation prohibits trade unions and collective bargaining. Mill owners introduce machines, reducing wages. But you build your own machine. Problem solved? You helping labor or capital?

            @FediThing @tante

            pluralistic@mamot.frP shiri@foggyminds.comS 2 Replies Last reply
            0
            • osma@mas.toO osma@mas.to

              Good critique. And I say this, as well as like your arguments, while also believing there are certain domains where LLMs do have reasonable utility value - nowhere near the value required to make OpenAI, Antrophic or the rest profitable, but some value nonetheless.
              @tante

              flesh@transfem.socialF This user is from outside of this forum
              flesh@transfem.socialF This user is from outside of this forum
              flesh@transfem.social
              wrote last edited by
              #49

              @osma@mas.to @tante@tldr.nettime.org It has debatable utility in some uses, but nowhere near enough to make the industry worth keeping around given the ethical concerns. The utility is effectively immaterial compared to the self-parody levels of evil on display from OpenAI and its ilk.

              osma@mas.toO 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • pluralistic@mamot.frP pluralistic@mamot.fr

                @herrLorenz @tante

                This falls into the "you are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts" territory.

                herrlorenz@chaos.socialH This user is from outside of this forum
                herrlorenz@chaos.socialH This user is from outside of this forum
                herrlorenz@chaos.social
                wrote last edited by
                #50

                @pluralistic @tante I just spoke about my impression, but didn't lay claim to objective truth. I'll keep reading along. ✌️

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • pluralistic@mamot.frP pluralistic@mamot.fr

                  @raymaccarthy @simonzerafa @tante

                  Again, what does checking the punctuation on a single essay per day have to do with "play[ing] Russian Roulette every day for hours?"

                  shiri@foggyminds.comS This user is from outside of this forum
                  shiri@foggyminds.comS This user is from outside of this forum
                  shiri@foggyminds.com
                  wrote last edited by
                  #51

                  @pluralistic I'd be disappointed if I didn't see myself in the pattern of engaging with people on a post like this who are worlds away from having a fair discussion...

                  They literally can't see the reality of AI beyond their arguments, they've decided it's inherently evil and wrong and locked in their viewpoint.

                  So their "russian roulette every day for hours" is because, despite you saying what you use it for, they can't comprehend how it can be used outside of the worst possible use cases.

                  Same reason they're accusing you of being a libertarian, but that's already the purity culture you were originally calling out.

                  @simonzerafa @raymaccarthy @tante

                  fruitcakesareyum@mastodon.socialF 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • pluralistic@mamot.frP pluralistic@mamot.fr

                    @herrLorenz @tante

                    > Cory shows his libertarian leanings here...

                    > Many people criticizing LLMs come from a somewhat leftist (in contrast to Cory’s libertarian) background.

                    cjpaloma@mstdn.socialC This user is from outside of this forum
                    cjpaloma@mstdn.socialC This user is from outside of this forum
                    cjpaloma@mstdn.social
                    wrote last edited by
                    #52

                    @pluralistic @herrLorenz @tante that second example goes well into overreach territory, and I can see why you'd be not happy with it.

                    And/but a big part of libertarian appeal is that it does muddy how being "individually free from regulation" can be cast as liberatory. As if individual freedom is all that's needed. "I'm free when there are no regulations" is obviously shallow to lefties, but it (individual freedom) is also a component of why people are lefties, there's real overlap.

                    pluralistic@mamot.frP 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • skyfaller@jawns.clubS skyfaller@jawns.club

                      @pluralistic I think you can answer these questions yourself.

                      Suppose you wore a coat made out of mink fur. The minks are already dead, simply wearing the coat won't kill more minks. What does wearing mink fur have to do with cruelty to minks?

                      Suppose you live in the time of the Luddites. Legislation prohibits trade unions and collective bargaining. Mill owners introduce machines, reducing wages. But you build your own machine. Problem solved? You helping labor or capital?

                      @FediThing @tante

                      pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
                      pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
                      pluralistic@mamot.fr
                      wrote last edited by
                      #53

                      @skyfaller @FediThing @tante

                      This is a "fruit of the poisoned tree" argument.

                      Suppose you use a computer to post to Mastodon, despite the fact that silicon transistors were invented by the eugenicist William Shockley, who spent his Nobel money offering bribes to women of color to be sterlized?

                      Suppose you sent that Mastodon post on a packet-switched network, despite the fact that this technology was invented by the war criminals at the RAND corporation?

                      pluralistic@mamot.frP skyfaller@jawns.clubS 2 Replies Last reply
                      0
                      • pluralistic@mamot.frP pluralistic@mamot.fr

                        @skyfaller @FediThing @tante

                        This is a "fruit of the poisoned tree" argument.

                        Suppose you use a computer to post to Mastodon, despite the fact that silicon transistors were invented by the eugenicist William Shockley, who spent his Nobel money offering bribes to women of color to be sterlized?

                        Suppose you sent that Mastodon post on a packet-switched network, despite the fact that this technology was invented by the war criminals at the RAND corporation?

                        pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
                        pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
                        pluralistic@mamot.fr
                        wrote last edited by
                        #54

                        @skyfaller @FediThing @tante

                        Also, you're wrong about the Luddites, just as a factual matter. The guilds the Luddites sprang from weren't prohibited by law, they were *protected* by law, and the Luddites' cause wasn't about gaining new protections under statute, but rather, enforcing existing statutory protections.

                        (Also: the Luddites didn't oppose steam looms or stocking frames; their demands were for fair deployment of these)

                        skyfaller@jawns.clubS 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • flesh@transfem.socialF flesh@transfem.social

                          @osma@mas.to @tante@tldr.nettime.org It has debatable utility in some uses, but nowhere near enough to make the industry worth keeping around given the ethical concerns. The utility is effectively immaterial compared to the self-parody levels of evil on display from OpenAI and its ilk.

                          osma@mas.toO This user is from outside of this forum
                          osma@mas.toO This user is from outside of this forum
                          osma@mas.to
                          wrote last edited by
                          #55

                          Whatever I just wrote, thanks. Don't see why we should debate it.
                          @flesh

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
                            pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
                            pluralistic@mamot.fr
                            wrote last edited by
                            #56

                            @FediThing @tante

                            > I am not clear on how this connects to discussing origins of technologies

                            Because the arguments against running an LLM on your own computer boil down to, "The LLM was made by bad people, or in bad ways."

                            This is a purity culture standard, a "fruit of the poisoned tree" argument, and while it is often dressed up in objectivity ("I don't use the fruit of the poisoned tree"), it is just special pleading ("the fruits of the poisoned tree that I use don't count, because __").

                            pluralistic@mamot.frP 1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • pluralistic@mamot.frP pluralistic@mamot.fr

                              @FediThing @tante

                              > I am not clear on how this connects to discussing origins of technologies

                              Because the arguments against running an LLM on your own computer boil down to, "The LLM was made by bad people, or in bad ways."

                              This is a purity culture standard, a "fruit of the poisoned tree" argument, and while it is often dressed up in objectivity ("I don't use the fruit of the poisoned tree"), it is just special pleading ("the fruits of the poisoned tree that I use don't count, because __").

                              pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
                              pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
                              pluralistic@mamot.fr
                              wrote last edited by
                              #57

                              @FediThing @tante

                              > Almost everyone using LLMs will use the online kind, so objections to LLMs are (reasonably IMHO) based on that scenario.

                              Except that in this specific instance, you are weighing on an article that claims that it is wrong to run a local LLM for the purposes of checking for punctuation errors.

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • tante@tldr.nettime.orgT tante@tldr.nettime.org

                                @pluralistic @simonzerafa on this one for example I fully agree with Cory. This is not him having a genAI system write or anything like that.

                                dhd6@jasette.facil.servicesD This user is from outside of this forum
                                dhd6@jasette.facil.servicesD This user is from outside of this forum
                                dhd6@jasette.facil.services
                                wrote last edited by
                                #58

                                @tante @pluralistic @simonzerafa I agree in principle with Cory, but I really wish that he had clarified that:

                                1. Ollama is not an LLM, it's a server for various models, of varying degrees of openness.
                                2. Open weights is not open source, the model is still a black box. We should support projects like OLMO, which are completely open, down to the training data set and checkpoints.
                                3. It's quite difficult to "seize that technology" without using Someone Else's Computer to do so (a.k.a clown/cloud)

                                dhd6@jasette.facil.servicesD 1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • cjpaloma@mstdn.socialC cjpaloma@mstdn.social

                                  @pluralistic @herrLorenz @tante that second example goes well into overreach territory, and I can see why you'd be not happy with it.

                                  And/but a big part of libertarian appeal is that it does muddy how being "individually free from regulation" can be cast as liberatory. As if individual freedom is all that's needed. "I'm free when there are no regulations" is obviously shallow to lefties, but it (individual freedom) is also a component of why people are lefties, there's real overlap.

                                  pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
                                  pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
                                  pluralistic@mamot.fr
                                  wrote last edited by
                                  #59

                                  @CJPaloma @herrLorenz @tante

                                  There is no virtue in being constrained or regulated per se.

                                  Regulation isn't a good unto itself.

                                  Regulation that is itself good - drawn up for a good purpose, designed to be administrable, and then competently administered - is good.

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • tante@tldr.nettime.orgT tante@tldr.nettime.org

                                    Yesterday Cory Doctorow argued that refusal to use LLMs was mere "neoliberal purity culture". I think his argument is a strawman, doesn't align with his own actions and delegitimizes important political actions we need to make in order to build a better cyberphysical world.

                                    Link Preview Image
                                    Acting ethically in an imperfect world

                                    Life is complicated. Regardless of what your beliefs or politics or ethics are, the way that we set up our society and economy will often force you to act against them: You might not want to fly somewhere but your employer will not accept another mode of transportation, you want to eat vegan but are […]

                                    favicon

                                    Smashing Frames (tante.cc)

                                    hopeless@mas.toH This user is from outside of this forum
                                    hopeless@mas.toH This user is from outside of this forum
                                    hopeless@mas.to
                                    wrote last edited by
                                    #60

                                    @tante It seems to me Doctorow is obviously correct about this. But I don't think it matters too much if you don't agree... the trajectory of LLMs is going to be whatever it is going to be.

                                    If you don't like it and have buddies that don't like it either, that's not a bad thing especially if you are undergoing real negative effects from it.

                                    It's just if you stray from reality (whatever that will be) too far for too long, you will end up with a big shock when forced to rejoin it.

                                    jeffgrigg@mastodon.socialJ 1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • skyfaller@jawns.clubS skyfaller@jawns.club

                                      @pluralistic I think you can answer these questions yourself.

                                      Suppose you wore a coat made out of mink fur. The minks are already dead, simply wearing the coat won't kill more minks. What does wearing mink fur have to do with cruelty to minks?

                                      Suppose you live in the time of the Luddites. Legislation prohibits trade unions and collective bargaining. Mill owners introduce machines, reducing wages. But you build your own machine. Problem solved? You helping labor or capital?

                                      @FediThing @tante

                                      shiri@foggyminds.comS This user is from outside of this forum
                                      shiri@foggyminds.comS This user is from outside of this forum
                                      shiri@foggyminds.com
                                      wrote last edited by
                                      #61

                                      @skyfaller I think you should be able to answer these questions yourself, but clearly are struggling...

                                      On your mink fur argument: the one ethical way to wear something like that is to only purchase used and old. The harm is done regardless of whether you purchase, you don't increase demand because your refusal to purchase new or recent means there's no profit in it. (This argument is also flawed because it's assuming local LLMs are made for profit when no profit is made on them)

                                      And on your Luddite argument: When someone is using a machine to further oppress workers, the issue is not the machine but the person using it. You attack the machine to deprive them of it. But when an individual is using a completely separate instance of the machine, contributing nothing to those who are using the machine to abuse people... attacking them is simply attacking the worker.

                                      @tante @FediThing @pluralistic

                                      skyfaller@jawns.clubS 1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • pluralistic@mamot.frP pluralistic@mamot.fr

                                        @skyfaller @FediThing @tante

                                        Also, you're wrong about the Luddites, just as a factual matter. The guilds the Luddites sprang from weren't prohibited by law, they were *protected* by law, and the Luddites' cause wasn't about gaining new protections under statute, but rather, enforcing existing statutory protections.

                                        (Also: the Luddites didn't oppose steam looms or stocking frames; their demands were for fair deployment of these)

                                        skyfaller@jawns.clubS This user is from outside of this forum
                                        skyfaller@jawns.clubS This user is from outside of this forum
                                        skyfaller@jawns.club
                                        wrote last edited by
                                        #62

                                        @pluralistic Thank you for the fact check. I was paraphrasing that text from the popular Nib comic: https://thenib.com/im-a-luddite/

                                        If this contains factual inaccuracies I will need to do more research and perhaps stop sharing that comic.

                                        @FediThing @tante

                                        pluralistic@mamot.frP 1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • skyfaller@jawns.clubS skyfaller@jawns.club

                                          @pluralistic Thank you for the fact check. I was paraphrasing that text from the popular Nib comic: https://thenib.com/im-a-luddite/

                                          If this contains factual inaccuracies I will need to do more research and perhaps stop sharing that comic.

                                          @FediThing @tante

                                          pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
                                          pluralistic@mamot.frP This user is from outside of this forum
                                          pluralistic@mamot.fr
                                          wrote last edited by
                                          #63

                                          @skyfaller @FediThing @tante I strongly recommend Brian Merchant's "Blood in the Machine" as the best modern history of the Luddites.

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • World
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups