[sjfkeifj]

Allow me to explain through an example:

When I protest that LLMs stole the collective creative output of all of humanity and are now trying to sell it back to us to supplant human creative output, or that it is an ecological, or economic, disaster, further consolidating wealth and power in a few narcissistic sociopaths, and defendants reply, "bUt ThE CApAbIlitIEs!!1!"

[api]

That’s not a problem with LLMs as a technology. It’s a problem with how LLM companies have been allowed to violate copyright at industrial scale. It’s a political and social problem.

The same indictment can be made about search companies and social media: that they are monetizing others work without compensation.

Or is there something about the tech that requires that it be deployed in this way?

My position is that LLMs trained without proper copyright authorization should not be copyrightable. They should be public domain.

As for the energy use: we either get our energy from polluting sources or we don’t. What we do with it is secondary. If we’re not using it to run AI we’d be using it to get a burrito delivered.

[omnimus]

So you identify the problems. I guess they happened out of thin air? The broken copyright has been allowed by someone... someone BAD!

Or maybe the companies broke the law, lobbied as much as possible, broke the law more, then bribed anyone with political power until they got to god emperor himself who said “this is progress”. And everything was just fine.

But that would mean that technology is political issue.

[api]

Uhh… that’s what I said. The problem is political.

[sjfkeifj]

The substantial political lobbying arms behind the ai bubble, big oil, and big coal thank you for your service.