i am so tired of "ethical concerns aside" being a phrase i see every single time someone tries to defend the use of LLMs.
-
@nicuveo@tech.lgbt I'll gladly stop using LLMs (professionally and personally) provided someone does the same tedious work they do for me at the same cost (i.e. near zero).
Ethics gotta step aside when 'I have to eat' and 'I can't think straight' is the cause. -
i am so tired of "ethical concerns aside" being a phrase i see every single time someone tries to defend the use of LLMs. fuck that! ethical concerns front and fucking center! it is very revealing that tech is currently in such a state that the quiet part can be said out loud without any pushback.
@nicuveo what about "ethical concerns aside, it doesn't even work for the stuff they say to use it for"
-
@nicuveo what about "ethical concerns aside, it doesn't even work for the stuff they say to use it for"
@gildilinie well, see, i agree, but it's important to stress that ethical concerns should be a priority *even if* it worked as well as they advertise. and that's why we have to keep stressing this: if somehow the bubble doesn't burst, they somehow manage to make the models better, they somehow manage to stay afloat, they somehow manage to make it work, we should still not cede an inch.
-
every conversation about the potential usefulness of AI, divorced from ethical concerns, is just this dril tweet
@nicuveo the same argument works for non-drunk driving
-
@gildilinie well, see, i agree, but it's important to stress that ethical concerns should be a priority *even if* it worked as well as they advertise. and that's why we have to keep stressing this: if somehow the bubble doesn't burst, they somehow manage to make the models better, they somehow manage to stay afloat, they somehow manage to make it work, we should still not cede an inch.
@nicuveo somehow
-
@nicuveo somehow
@gildilinie i agree it's not gonna happen; my point is just that we shouldn't argue about utility / usefulness when the debate is about ethics: debating about usefulness, even pointing out that LLMs suck (which they do, don't get me wrong) is elevating that topic to the same level.
in other words, to use a metaphor i saw in another thread: it's irrelevant whether the orphan-crushing machine is good for the economy or not. ^^" -
@gildilinie i agree it's not gonna happen; my point is just that we shouldn't argue about utility / usefulness when the debate is about ethics: debating about usefulness, even pointing out that LLMs suck (which they do, don't get me wrong) is elevating that topic to the same level.
in other words, to use a metaphor i saw in another thread: it's irrelevant whether the orphan-crushing machine is good for the economy or not. ^^"@nicuveo "i killed a dude and took his one billion dollar" and "i killed a man in Reno just to watch him die" are both unethical but very different situations
-
i am so tired of "ethical concerns aside" being a phrase i see every single time someone tries to defend the use of LLMs. fuck that! ethical concerns front and fucking center! it is very revealing that tech is currently in such a state that the quiet part can be said out loud without any pushback.
@nicuveo That's how BigTech became BigTech in the last ~15-20 years. It's much older than the public discussions about LLM. You just haven't talked about ethics at all for a long time.
-
i am so tired of "ethical concerns aside" being a phrase i see every single time someone tries to defend the use of LLMs. fuck that! ethical concerns front and fucking center! it is very revealing that tech is currently in such a state that the quiet part can be said out loud without any pushback.
@nicuveo I mean, I usually use it to say there's multiple layers to how shitty LLMs are, but mostly I reserve that for what I don't think the intended audience gives a shit about the suffering caused by the torment nexus.
-
@nicuveo I mean, I usually use it to say there's multiple layers to how shitty LLMs are, but mostly I reserve that for what I don't think the intended audience gives a shit about the suffering caused by the torment nexus.
@disorderlyf there's a huge difference between the criticism approach ("even putting ethics aside, there are a lot of issues with LLMs") and the defensive one ("but if you put ethics aside they have some value worth considering!"), IMHO. what you describe is the former, what i despise is the prevalence of the latter ^^
-
@disorderlyf there's a huge difference between the criticism approach ("even putting ethics aside, there are a lot of issues with LLMs") and the defensive one ("but if you put ethics aside they have some value worth considering!"), IMHO. what you describe is the former, what i despise is the prevalence of the latter ^^
@nicuveo I had a feeling that's where you stood on it, but I wasn't sure. In which case, it sounds like we're entirely in agreement, as I hear too many of these damned shills straight up pretending those problems don't exist and being like "but it is good now, actually"
-
every conversation about the potential usefulness of AI, divorced from ethical concerns, is just this dril tweet
@nicuveo Richard Stallman just did this toot opposing breathalyzers in cars: https://mastodon.xyz/@rms/116581752793267275
It's all tied together.
-
@MaddieM4@raphus.social @nicuveo@tech.lgbt
The former. I need to eat. Will you give me food?
I get food for the job I do. And medication. And a roof over my head.
Unless you can give me the same for work I'd do in a manner that satisfies you, the argument doesn't stand.
If anything, you're essentially saying "your health and safety don't matter, because the planet."
Sure, the planet. But I'm not going to martyr myself and my family for it.
Again: give me an alternative, and I'll gladly switch. If you can't, then we're at an impasse, because I still need to eat. -
@MaddieM4@raphus.social @nicuveo@tech.lgbt
The former. I need to eat. Will you give me food?
I get food for the job I do. And medication. And a roof over my head.
Unless you can give me the same for work I'd do in a manner that satisfies you, the argument doesn't stand.
If anything, you're essentially saying "your health and safety don't matter, because the planet."
Sure, the planet. But I'm not going to martyr myself and my family for it.
Again: give me an alternative, and I'll gladly switch. If you can't, then we're at an impasse, because I still need to eat.@phil @nicuveo @MaddieM4 this situation where we’re not allowed to survive unless we kill our life support systems is why we need unions and workers rights and environmental regulations and so on. Nobody can hand you a solution on a silver platter, but almost everybody can do something to make the situation harder to maintain; merely expressing objections still contributes to normalizing valuing preserving life support, obeying in advance is not necessary
-
E em0nm4stodon@infosec.exchange shared this topic
-
i am so tired of "ethical concerns aside" being a phrase i see every single time someone tries to defend the use of LLMs. fuck that! ethical concerns front and fucking center! it is very revealing that tech is currently in such a state that the quiet part can be said out loud without any pushback.
-
@nicuveo Richard Stallman just did this toot opposing breathalyzers in cars: https://mastodon.xyz/@rms/116581752793267275
It's all tied together.
@indigoparadox @nicuveo He says he is pro-breathalyzers in cars: "I think that if someone is convicted of driving under the influence, or something close to that, it is legitimate to attach a sensor-driven kill switch to stop per from driving while inebriated.", but the fact he links to a campaign against such things is pretty confusing.
-
@indigoparadox @nicuveo He says he is pro-breathalyzers in cars: "I think that if someone is convicted of driving under the influence, or something close to that, it is legitimate to attach a sensor-driven kill switch to stop per from driving while inebriated.", but the fact he links to a campaign against such things is pretty confusing.
@indigoparadox @nicuveo Seems like he is a quantum state where he is both for and against breathalyzers in cars.
-
@MaddieM4@raphus.social @nicuveo@tech.lgbt
The former. I need to eat. Will you give me food?
I get food for the job I do. And medication. And a roof over my head.
Unless you can give me the same for work I'd do in a manner that satisfies you, the argument doesn't stand.
If anything, you're essentially saying "your health and safety don't matter, because the planet."
Sure, the planet. But I'm not going to martyr myself and my family for it.
Again: give me an alternative, and I'll gladly switch. If you can't, then we're at an impasse, because I still need to eat.How did you survive so long without this life-saving miracle technology?
Same way as me?
-
@davey_cakes @phil @nicuveo @MaddieM4
Wanted to ask the same thing. Will they answer?
-
@davey_cakes@mastodon.ie @nicuveo@tech.lgbt @MaddieM4@raphus.social
Love the hate.
I was unemployed, miserable, separated from my partner, and on the verge of Bad Actions
. Then I got a job that pays okay for where I live, was able to import my partner, pay off a good chunk of my credit, and get my health into a stable state.
Not because of AI, but because I spent my time obsessively learning about information security for a years or so. AI, however, is a pre-requisite for working where I do, because of severe understaffing.
At the same time, I can't afford to lose this job, because I'd soon go back to the previous state of affairs. Turns out, to nobody's surprise, nobody else is willing to pay for my food, medicine, or shelter.
Are you? Or, are you willing to provide free labor for my employer so I can quit using LLMs to get my work done?
