please vote anonymously and boost this poll for transparency and participation:

[silvermoon82@wandering.shop]

@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.

[cgrymala@higheredweb.social]

@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.

[starlily@mastodon.social]

@falcennial
There is no ethical use of AI.

[codebeard@mastodonapp.uk]

@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.