tell me you’re a coward without telling me
-
@Athena LLM people saw the scene in Snowerpiercer where the kid is part of the engine and were like "yeah, let's do that".
-
tell me you’re a coward without telling me
No comment on this PR may mention the following topics:
Long-term social or economic impact of LLMs
The environmental impact of LLMs
Anything to do with the copyright status of LLM output
Moral judgements about people who use LLMs
We have asked the moderation team to help us enforce these rules.Add an LLM policy for `rust-lang/rust` by jyn514 · Pull Request #1040 · rust-lang/rust-forge
Information useful to people contributing to Rust. Contribute to rust-lang/rust-forge development by creating an account on GitHub.
GitHub (github.com)
@Athena Die Linke Baden-Württemberg recently banned internal usage of A.I. altogether ..for now.
-
tell me you’re a coward without telling me
No comment on this PR may mention the following topics:
Long-term social or economic impact of LLMs
The environmental impact of LLMs
Anything to do with the copyright status of LLM output
Moral judgements about people who use LLMs
We have asked the moderation team to help us enforce these rules.Add an LLM policy for `rust-lang/rust` by jyn514 · Pull Request #1040 · rust-lang/rust-forge
Information useful to people contributing to Rust. Contribute to rust-lang/rust-forge development by creating an account on GitHub.
GitHub (github.com)
@Athena "Friendliness" is a choice for categorizing projects and their moral and ethical stance on a heated issue.
"War-friendly"
"Disease-friendly"
... -
I cannot believe I have to say this but DON’T HARASS, THREATEN OR ESPECIALLY STALK ANYONE OVER THIS. Or any programming language shit. that’s not okay. What the fuck is wrong with you people.
@Athena What if I explain to TÜV that LLM tainted compilers should make everything they compile be considered LLM output for the purposes of their review and V&V requirements. I'm sure everyone using rust for safety critical firmware would love the extra scrutiny (and associated costs).
-
i wrote a thing https://parthen.online/notes/rust-llm-rfc/
@Athena
typos
resonsible -> responsible
dicatate -> dictate -
@rl_dane @reiddragon @Athena pretty much they’re equal enough wrt eugenics, but TESCREALists often “excel” in more than one field
-
@stag oh I read the context paragraphs; I also super disagree that they make it any better
-
@stag the (checks notes) linked zulip discussion I am not allowed to see
-
i wrote a thing https://parthen.online/notes/rust-llm-rfc/
the reasoning is “GitHub isn’t the right place for ethical discussions, do it on the zulip”
the linked zulip:
-
i wrote a thing https://parthen.online/notes/rust-llm-rfc/
@Athena this should be the policy for a lot more than just rust.
-
cited as reason to allow LLM contributions experimentally:
Instead of using ethical concerns as a basis for policy, we should justify policy on the basis of how something is impacting our ability as a project to deliver a really great programming language.
if the orphan grinder lets us make a better programming language then FIRE THOSE BABIES UP
@Athena I am suddenly less interested in their policy on LLMs and more interested in their policy on ethics. Excluding ethical concerns as a basis for policy is what you do when you know your preferred policies are unethical. Any project which accepts such an exclusion should be treated as a threat.
-
@Athena I am suddenly less interested in their policy on LLMs and more interested in their policy on ethics. Excluding ethical concerns as a basis for policy is what you do when you know your preferred policies are unethical. Any project which accepts such an exclusion should be treated as a threat.
@ShadSterling the given reasoning is “well some people say it’s good so there’s no way to know if it’s really good or bad and we all just have to agree to disagree about the ethics”
-
@ShadSterling the given reasoning is “well some people say it’s good so there’s no way to know if it’s really good or bad and we all just have to agree to disagree about the ethics”
@Athena but accepting all is more like refusing to disagree. Refusing to disagree over ethics means accepting unethical policies. It removes resistance to doing harm
-
@divVerent @Athena spellcheck has been around forever and non-LLM-based ones are a lot less likely to turn misspellings - or *unusual, correctly-spelled words* - into other superficially similar word-forms that end up changing the message
(although i still remember MS Word's grammar checker always telling me to use "form" instead of "from" where i obviously meant the latter so it wasn't exactly good then either)
> I should not need to care how
this is the kind of user known as "part of the problem"@Athena@chaosfem.tw @ophis@brain.worm.pink I have to contradict there. So you want people who use proprietary software at all (including cloud hosted one, like Gmail) to not contribute to open source projects at all.
That is a valid view one can have. So better block me, as right now I am typing this on an iPad with the built in Apple keyboard that has a prediction feature that is supposedly based on some form of LLM. I am never actually using the word predictions, but that is just me telling you, you have no way of knowing I am honest.
Similarly, I would assume without knowing that Office 365's grammar check uses an LLM. Previous versions supposedly did not use an LLM but a machine learning approach nevertheless (one from a time before the chatbot hype). But honestly? I do not know that. Microsoft could ship an auto update that adds a LLM.
Also, I expect a future Chrome and Firefox to both contain LLMs for text checking. Would you want those browsers then to be banned from all open source discussions? Or would you then demand that open source related discussion sites take measures to disable the LLMs, e.g. by reimplementing the text field (and breaking accessibility for the blind in the process)?
As for LibreOffice - I can check the source code there. Have you seen it though? To find out for sure there is no LLM (which is my assumption) there I would have to sift through one of the least readable code bases ever.
No, in my opinion standard writing tools should be allowed, provided one personally reads and verifies the output. The professor in your example has specifically not done that. You have, or else you would not have noticed the form/from.
Anything else is discriminating against non native speakers, of which my wife has received more than enough in our time in Trumpistan. She was forced to use LLM based writing tools there, or else she was immediately ignored for basically "writing with an accent" (and telephone was outright impossible for both of us). Heck, we A/B tested that, and her accent in writing is not even that bad - but bad enough to immediately be noticed by Americans.
If we could instead move to a world in which people with accents and imperfect writing are accepted (like we had in the 90s when I started on the internet, and like half the people on IRC had some obvious accent and it was okay), I would prefer that, and then nobody would need this LLM stuff. But right now it is basic accessibility for non native speakers. Even I probably am writing with an accent here. -
@Athena unless someone is literally stalking sam altman -- and we _all_ know they're not -- they're taking out their anger on the wrong target, even if that target is the biggest LLM advocate that ever walked the earth
-
tell me you’re a coward without telling me
No comment on this PR may mention the following topics:
Long-term social or economic impact of LLMs
The environmental impact of LLMs
Anything to do with the copyright status of LLM output
Moral judgements about people who use LLMs
We have asked the moderation team to help us enforce these rules.Add an LLM policy for `rust-lang/rust` by jyn514 · Pull Request #1040 · rust-lang/rust-forge
Information useful to people contributing to Rust. Contribute to rust-lang/rust-forge development by creating an account on GitHub.
GitHub (github.com)
@Athena I have read hundreds of posts on the ethics of LLMs on the rust-lang Zulip. They have had and are having those discussions. Just not in the policy document itself
-
tell me you’re a coward without telling me
No comment on this PR may mention the following topics:
Long-term social or economic impact of LLMs
The environmental impact of LLMs
Anything to do with the copyright status of LLM output
Moral judgements about people who use LLMs
We have asked the moderation team to help us enforce these rules.Add an LLM policy for `rust-lang/rust` by jyn514 · Pull Request #1040 · rust-lang/rust-forge
Information useful to people contributing to Rust. Contribute to rust-lang/rust-forge development by creating an account on GitHub.
GitHub (github.com)
@Athena@chaosfem.tw yuck. It would simply be best to not accept these submissions at all when there is a significant portion of the community which raise uncontested ethical concerns. That they cannot see this as a problem is pretty icky. Plus, jackh as lost almost all benefit of the doubt from me after that horrible LLM-generated Rust community update.
-
@Athena@chaosfem.tw @ophis@brain.worm.pink I have to contradict there. So you want people who use proprietary software at all (including cloud hosted one, like Gmail) to not contribute to open source projects at all.
That is a valid view one can have. So better block me, as right now I am typing this on an iPad with the built in Apple keyboard that has a prediction feature that is supposedly based on some form of LLM. I am never actually using the word predictions, but that is just me telling you, you have no way of knowing I am honest.
Similarly, I would assume without knowing that Office 365's grammar check uses an LLM. Previous versions supposedly did not use an LLM but a machine learning approach nevertheless (one from a time before the chatbot hype). But honestly? I do not know that. Microsoft could ship an auto update that adds a LLM.
Also, I expect a future Chrome and Firefox to both contain LLMs for text checking. Would you want those browsers then to be banned from all open source discussions? Or would you then demand that open source related discussion sites take measures to disable the LLMs, e.g. by reimplementing the text field (and breaking accessibility for the blind in the process)?
As for LibreOffice - I can check the source code there. Have you seen it though? To find out for sure there is no LLM (which is my assumption) there I would have to sift through one of the least readable code bases ever.
No, in my opinion standard writing tools should be allowed, provided one personally reads and verifies the output. The professor in your example has specifically not done that. You have, or else you would not have noticed the form/from.
Anything else is discriminating against non native speakers, of which my wife has received more than enough in our time in Trumpistan. She was forced to use LLM based writing tools there, or else she was immediately ignored for basically "writing with an accent" (and telephone was outright impossible for both of us). Heck, we A/B tested that, and her accent in writing is not even that bad - but bad enough to immediately be noticed by Americans.
If we could instead move to a world in which people with accents and imperfect writing are accepted (like we had in the 90s when I started on the internet, and like half the people on IRC had some obvious accent and it was okay), I would prefer that, and then nobody would need this LLM stuff. But right now it is basic accessibility for non native speakers. Even I probably am writing with an accent here.@divVerent @Athena as a native english speaker jesus FUCKING christ please i'm begging you get the hell rid of the slop machine
i'll take broken engrish over *that* garbage any day, and will misinterpret a lot less -
@divVerent @Athena as a native english speaker jesus FUCKING christ please i'm begging you get the hell rid of the slop machine
i'll take broken engrish over *that* garbage any day, and will misinterpret a lot less@Athena@chaosfem.tw @ophis@brain.worm.pink You seem to be the exception there, though. Persomally I use no tools other than the one forced on me (like predictive text bars on mobile keyboards I generally ignore).
But I understand it is a necessary accessibility tool for some, and do not want it outright banned for that reason alone.
As said, alternatively get those right wing extremists out (shoot every single last one of them to Mars), and then maybe society will become more tolerant to accents again. Maybe. -
@Athena@chaosfem.tw @ophis@brain.worm.pink You seem to be the exception there, though. Persomally I use no tools other than the one forced on me (like predictive text bars on mobile keyboards I generally ignore).
But I understand it is a necessary accessibility tool for some, and do not want it outright banned for that reason alone.
As said, alternatively get those right wing extremists out (shoot every single last one of them to Mars), and then maybe society will become more tolerant to accents again. Maybe.@Athena@chaosfem.tw @ophis@brain.worm.pink Furthermore I predict that all major web browsers will have a builtin slop machine by 2030 in form of replacing the built-in spell checker for textarea fields by a slop machine.
What should we do then? Sticking to older browser versions means being free wild for security exploits. And there are only two browser engines left, so once Chromium and Firefox have a built-in slop machine, all browsers do.
Should we then boycott <textarea> and build our own text fields - screw the blind? Or block all major browsers and do "this website can only be viewed with Dillo"?
