• bridgeenjoyer@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    2 days ago

    Not sure why you’re getting the downvotes. Your comment is educated and makes sense. I’m still against the use of LLM’s based on the fact they are pure theft, owned by billionaires, and destroying the earth, but I do agree, at least use it correctly and use the correct tool. If all information was paid for, all data centers owned by the public, completely transparent on the info they contain, and ran completely on renewable energy, there’d be nothing really wrong with the tech (other than creating slop that destroyed the internet and eroded trust in everything, which is a massive downside).

    • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      All true.

      … Though I’m personally more forgiving Apache-licensed, open weights models trained on peanuts.

      Ripping out the commercial aspect and intensity of training nullifies out a whole lot of issues, just like open source code does, even if the models are still problematic (just like a lot of open source code/projects are problematic).

      I’m also of the opinion that massive LLM proliferation exacerbated the cracks in internet and institutions that were already there. They were already in trouble, but all this just made it glaringly obvious.