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 […]

A blog post I found in response to Cory Doctorow taking a pro-LLM stance in a recent post of his.

  • loathsome dongeater@lemmygrad.mlOPEnglish
    7·
    8 days ago

    Yeah there are strange takes on both sides. Doctorow for example talks about liberating LLMs and his act of liberation is just… using a local model. Normal people cannot liberate LLMs because asidr from the extremely high level of expertise, it requires a bonkers amount of resources. As such the only thing adjacent to liberation that is happening right now is the release of Chinese open source models. No one gives a fuck about Mistral, Trinity or Llama. But Doctorow does not get into the details of this liberation.

    Tante’s post on the other hand also has soms good bits. Purity testing is an idealistic distraction but purity testing is often used as a strawman to distract from what he called negative externalities. But the part about Omelas is just crazy. Who reads that story and concludes that the correct choice to walk away?

    • darkernations@lemmygrad.ml
      7·
      7 days ago

      It’s only through ML the contradictions are sublimated ie the solution to privatised control is not to unsocialise the labour but to socialise control of the means of production as an extension of socialised labour… which is why China is winning whereas the best West has to offer to counter what they consider “corporatism” is limitinv - either anti-AI artisanal variety of reaction or “pro-AI” but some version of what Doctorow has to offer as a solution - ie individualised “emancipation” (and I still think your article was a good share)