This reply is so perfect, I would almost think it's satire.
And to talk about "serious engagement with the subject" while doing that is just salt in the wound. Yes, let's fucking engage seriously with the subject! Where is that happening, though?
And claiming that it is the "most amazing technology humans have ever invented" is telling. Also claiming that a contrarian opinion is immediately rooted in tribal fear and ignorance. Ever bothered to stop and think that there might be good reasons to reject LLMs as a technology the way it is currently being used or is YOUR view of that maybe wilful ignorance and fueled by tribal fear?
But the response you gave was just perfectly playing exactly into the point the parent comment was making.
Yes, absolutely. But denying their obvious capabilities is not a very effective way to do that.
I don't see much thought-through analysis from the anti-AI crowd. That seems to have a lot to do with the fact that they're not actually very familiar with the technology, from either a practical or theoretical perspective.
This means they rely on what they assume will be an effective tactic, trying to claim that the machines that are smarter than they are in many respects are somehow... not. Which puts them in very obvious conflict with reality. Counterfactuals are not a great basis for a protest movement.
As for the parent comment, it was talking about "pedantic games of gotcha." I reject the idea that that's what my comment was doing. The idea that LLMs are copy-pasting snippets is ludicrous delusion. But maybe you don't realize that either?
Also, point of order: "The satire was apparently lost on you" makes no sense, since I wrote the comment and it wasn't intended as satire.
LLMs and AI derivates are interesting technology with many possible applications. However their externalities, including but not limited to the further consolidation of power in the hands of a few, rising inequality, increased propaganda, spam, scams, surveillance, uses in war, loss of critical thought and skills, cementing loneliness and driving suicide, devaluing of art, consumption of resources, increase in tech prices, etc, etc, etc, etc aren’t worth it.
That’s just it. It isn’t worth it. LLMs are interesting, but not that interesting, and that should be clear to anyone with the ability to have some empathy and look beyond their own nose.
Is it your goal to derail every post related to AI like this?
It has to do with your post that I replied to. I’ll remind you of your own words:
> I don't see much thought-through analysis from the anti-AI crowd. That seems to have a lot to do with the fact that they're not actually very familiar with the technology, from either a practical or theoretical perspective.
You made a general comment, and that’s what I replied to. You then made a more targeted comment (“As for the parent comment”), which I did not reply to.
> Is it your goal to derail every post related to AI like this?
What an absurd accusation. Indeed reinforcing you’re not arguing in good faith and this is a waste of time.
> I don't see much thought-through analysis from the anti-AI crowd. That seems to have a lot to do with the fact that they're not actually very familiar with the technology, from either a practical or theoretical perspective.
So you imply that anyone anti-AI is not actually familiar with the technology? So only a true Scotsman is able to appreciate the beauty of AI?
> the machines that are smarter than they are
Depends on your definition of smart.
> Also, point of order: "The satire was apparently lost on you" makes no sense, since I wrote the comment and it wasn't intended as satire.
I'll just let that stand for itself and encourage you to read the thread again if it's not beyond your context window.
Personally, I’m extremely sick of seeing people—especially on this website—spewing that tired fallacious talking point.
If you believe LLMs to be “the most amazing technology humans have ever invented”, I think you lack imagination. Medicine, agriculture, computers themselves… There are entire fields of inventions which are more amazing and important than LLMs. You’re just used to them so pay them no mind.
The fact you think opposing arguments are “tribal fear and wilful ignorance” shows you pay no attention to them and dismiss them without engaging in good faith.
Also, I didn’t say all opposing arguments fit the description I gave. “Good faith” is not sufficient here - you need to engage with intelligence and reading comprehension, as well.
I would submit that your accusation of willful thinking smells like a case of projection.
And before we go there, no, I don’t like it when people who don’t like the tech start calling everyone who hates it less than they do a booster, either.
Ah, yes, nothing subjective here, no sir.