please vote anonymously and boost this poll for transparency and participation:
-
@falcennial @FreakyFwoof I’m interpreting “chat” to mean voice to voice conversation; something I never do. If this is not what is meant by “chat” the wording of this post may need changing. If you really mean chat, then awesome! My vote stands.
@amy0223 @FreakyFwoof good one, thanks Amy.
my answer is that I appreciate when people use their own definitions in their answers, because what better way to contextualise their own experience than with meaningful definitions. I appreciate it doubly when they share those definitons, as you have done – thanks!
for everyone else, dictionaries are a great tool for the job. or I'm happy to share my own as a last resort. I consider a "chat" to be communication exchange of 3 or more total volleys.
-
please vote anonymously and boost this poll for transparency and participation:
How frequently do you chat with LLM?
this poll tells us only what some tiny subset of mastodon users, who are in turn a microscopically small group, think
-
please vote anonymously and boost this poll for transparency and participation:
How frequently do you chat with LLM?
@falcennial My answer was "not at all" but the truth is I don't know.
I don't intentionally use LLMs.
But when I deal with businesses, is their phone tree real or AI? The chat window I have to go through to reach a customer service agent? The search on their site that's the only way I can find information?
I avoid LLMs rigorously and I suspect I use them far more than I realize.
-
@faduda call that the Turing Patience Test
-
@svavar personally my current definition of chat is a back and forth of 3 or more message volleys. (not 3 each, 3 total).
I would leave definitions up to the answerer's judgement though. dictionaries have useful ones so if it's a puzzle one can't put into words, a judgement call or a dictionary check are both legit ways to do it.
I find the huge diversity of people's experiences very educational.
How could the total be an odd number given that you always get a response from the machine?
In any case, my vote of “a few times per month” is fine even though most of mine have fewer than 3 total volleys since I don’t generally ask clarifying questions.
Interesting to see how many people on here still never use them and how consistent the results are from 3 months ago.
Thanks!
-
@falcennial what do you mean by chatting? do you mean all use cases? or just personal use cases? excluding formal use cases, research cases etc?
@bigpawedbear hey Bear. I leave that to each respondent to decide the meaning of, because ones own definition and context of choice is always relevant.
a few people have found the question a challenge, risen to it, made decisions to answer it, and then shared context. incredibly generous. there is a ton of insight, all of which is open to all to learn from.
if you'd like to do similar, or even if you'd rather share a full answer and skip the poll I assure you you'll be heard and valued too.
-
@falcennial
Chat as in "use" or as in "having an actual conversation"?@Flominator I'd leave the definitions and context of choice to the answerer. I have learned, when asking about people's lived experience, to use their definitions of things.
thanks for clarifying.
-
@falcennial My answer was "not at all" but the truth is I don't know.
I don't intentionally use LLMs.
But when I deal with businesses, is their phone tree real or AI? The chat window I have to go through to reach a customer service agent? The search on their site that's the only way I can find information?
I avoid LLMs rigorously and I suspect I use them far more than I realize.
Yeah not a 100% sure what the question is.
Is it do I USE a LLM to chat? = Hell no
Am I forced to chat to LLMS when contacting say a bank? Yes but I tend to disengage
-
@rwwh @falcennial which ones do you use?
@Kicoud @falcennial past time I’ve used gemma4-12b.
-
@falcennial My answer was "not at all" but the truth is I don't know.
I don't intentionally use LLMs.
But when I deal with businesses, is their phone tree real or AI? The chat window I have to go through to reach a customer service agent? The search on their site that's the only way I can find information?
I avoid LLMs rigorously and I suspect I use them far more than I realize.
@AdaraAstin wisely put. it's an infrastructural problem.
like maintaining a vegan diet in a country where milk powder is a food additive in almost every food. does eating it make one "not vegan"? that question is a trick. it's an infrastructure issue. the culprits, have no right to compromise a person's identity or values by putting milk powder in their food. the victim is not in question. the abusers are.
the real question is how will we break those who abuse our resources.
-
@AdaraAstin wisely put. it's an infrastructural problem.
like maintaining a vegan diet in a country where milk powder is a food additive in almost every food. does eating it make one "not vegan"? that question is a trick. it's an infrastructure issue. the culprits, have no right to compromise a person's identity or values by putting milk powder in their food. the victim is not in question. the abusers are.
the real question is how will we break those who abuse our resources.
@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.
️ -
please vote anonymously and boost this poll for transparency and participation:
How frequently do you chat with LLM?
@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.
-
How could the total be an odd number given that you always get a response from the machine?
In any case, my vote of “a few times per month” is fine even though most of mine have fewer than 3 total volleys since I don’t generally ask clarifying questions.
Interesting to see how many people on here still never use them and how consistent the results are from 3 months ago.
Thanks!
@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!
) -
@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
