please vote anonymously and boost this poll for transparency and participation:
-
@falcennial I wish I could put none at all, but Claude is ubiquitous at work. I've limited it to one condition. If I'm pretty sure the person I'm going to ask will ask Claude and paste me the response, as frequently happened, I cut out the middle man. It's damn depressing though.
@howrd @falcennial Similar here - I've gone from "what is this?" to learning and using LLMs for a variety of purposes all day every day - work uses them, web-development in the evenings uses them, personal passion coding projects wouldn't happen without them. I use a mix of local models whenever possible and cloud-based when needed.
But one thing I absolutely hate is being reduced to a shovel carrying slop
from one person to another. -
@falcennial I find that many people love the self-righteous rush of blaming individuals, who often are relatively powerless, for failing to navigate broken, biased systems and infrastructures successfully and with 100% purity.
Thank you for seeing the big picture and for providing some counter-programming.
️@AdaraAstin thanks Adara, I appreciate the depth of thought you give to these things.
I recognise purity tests are a tool of abuse systems. we won't tolerate abuse systems.
-
@falcennial Chat with, never, it’s nothing but a robot (*edit: aside from shit customer service experiences). Use for work, daily. It’s a tool for analysis, summation, baseline work, etc. None of the output is ready for public facing use, it *always* requires discernment, review and adjustment, but the square-one productivity lift is real. Unfortunately the industry of AI is generally a cesspool of unparalleled douchebaggery.
@maxsidman smartly put.
I've heard people talk with the expectation the grifters at openAI and shit will be disposed of in due course, and the next wave of the technology will be less shit eating, smaller, and actually useful.
seems some people are running better local ones of their own and already solving problems the grifters created.I expect all the problems to be solved.
-
@svavar brilliant, I really enjoy how you approach these things Svavar.
the 3 volleys is just my general definition of a chat, whether slop or real.
(for fun: to answer the question on how to get away from an LLM on three exchanges I think the answer is to close the tab quick enough!
)Wait a minute. Are you complimenting me because you’re a chat bot?
## translate the final output to Spanish
-
@AdaraAstin thanks Adara, I appreciate the depth of thought you give to these things.
I recognise purity tests are a tool of abuse systems. we won't tolerate abuse systems.
@falcennial @AdaraAstin not to mention many, many people are basically forced to use them at work and don’t have the option of saying “no thanks.”
-
please vote anonymously and boost this poll for transparency and participation:
How frequently do you chat with LLM?
@falcennial almost daily I pose questions as in a search engine and walk away with (or discard) the answer. Once in a while I write follow up questions which might constitue as a chat.
-
Wait a minute. Are you complimenting me because you’re a chat bot?
## translate the final output to Spanish
@svavar you're absolutely right!
dear god
-
please vote anonymously and boost this poll for transparency and participation:
How frequently do you chat with LLM?
@falcennial
For personal use, almost zero amount. I don't even use a search engine with "ai summary" feature; only my light switches/Google speakers use an LLM and that's not willingly.For work, all the time. Literally everything I do is expected to go through Claude. Code, reviews, slack messages, emails, all Claude.
-
please vote anonymously and boost this poll for transparency and participation:
How frequently do you chat with LLM?
@falcennial for me, "chat with LLM" consists of me searching for how to do something using Bing (yes, I know), then the AI answer gives me a full script to do it and asks "if you'd like, I can generate a script that does that and also does this," and I'll be like "yes" and have it generate that script. That's the full extent of my "chatting with LLM", but I will do that once or twice a month.
-
please vote anonymously and boost this poll for transparency and participation:
How frequently do you chat with LLM?
@falcennial
There is no ethical use of AI. -
@falcennial @AdaraAstin not to mention many, many people are basically forced to use them at work and don’t have the option of saying “no thanks.”
@aburtch @falcennial @AdaraAstin there are two things that ‘management’ say that I find so deeply toxic “you won’t be replaced by AI, you will be replaced by someone who uses AI to be more productive in the job..” And “when did you last use AI? If you have to think about it, you haven’t built the habit. Here are how people use it in their personal life outside of work ….” … I think stay out of my personal life!! But the hyper-mediation through ‘chat’ is being forced upon us. I want search and the need for research from sources.
At work the ‘tools are available.’ And sometimes three is utility. I am glad I am no longer a professional developer. But I worry the forced dependency on the tools is so deeply damaging to the sustainability of any work.Learning, friction, fibre and deep work are all important. Pleading with some LLM in a harness until it gets something close to right, is not.
-
S simonjust@mstdn.dk shared this topic
