• ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    2 months ago

    In this case, I think we are going to see such improvements because there’s a direct benefit to companies operating LLMs to save costs. It’s also worth noting that a lot of the improvements are happening in open source space, and I firmly believe that’s how this tech should be developed in the first place.

    I find complaining about the fact that generative models exist isn’t really productive. There’s no putting toothpaste back in the tube at this point. However, it is valuable to have discussions regarding how this tech should be developed and used going forward.

      • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 months ago

        I’m well aware of Jevons Paradox, however what it says is that we’ll always find new use for energy surplus. If it wasn’t LLMs then it would just be something else. There’s nothing uniquely bad about AI, it’s just a technology that can be used in a sensible way or not. The thing we need to be focusing on is how we structure our society to ensure that we’re not using technology in ways that’s harmful to us.

          • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            2 months ago

            Well you brought up Jevons paradox here, which kind of is an inevitabilist argument. My view is simply that Jevons paradox is an observation of how capitalist system operates, and as long as this system of relations remains in place we will see problems with how technology is used.

            If one believes nothing can or even should be done about destructive excesses of capitalism, where’s the leftism part even begin?

            I think I was very clear that I think that destructive excesses of capitalism are precisely the problem here. What I continue to point out that, that’s a completely separate discussion from whether LLMs exist or not.

            There actually is considering the jobs and consequent material conditions affected by it that were otherwise unaffected before its use. Just saying it’s all the same sounds like downright drilposting.

            The jobs and consequent material conditions are affected by the capitalist system of relations and how it uses automation in ways that are hostile to workers. Automation itself is not the problem here.

            No shit. Same deal with CFCs, high fructose corn syrup, partially hydrogenated soybean oil, and leaded gasoline. Saying “do nothing, it’s inevitable and no different than anything before and it can’t be helped” yet also “restructure society” is downright paradoxical to me here.

            Nowhere did I say do nothing. What I actually said repeatedly is that you’re focusing on the wrong thing and that I don’t see technology itself as the problem.

      • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Again the issue here is with capitalism not with technology. I personally don’t see anything uniquely harmful that’s inherent in LLMs, and I think that it’s interesting technology that has a lot of legitimate uses. However, it’s clear to me that this tech will be used in horrible ways under our current economic system just like all other tech that’s used in horrible ways already.

        I’m not being fatalistic at all, I just think you’re barking up the wrong tree here.