@vv @bean @cwebber Alas, ZZ Top refused licensing rights.

@ObsidianUrbex The hottest dance club in town.

@catsalad note the deployed repulser pads for quick levitation if necessary.

@rysiek Yeah. Remember when "please forward this virus to your friends" was a dry joke?

@0xabad1dea But there would be fewer pets then, so he won't.

@kyonshi And this being so, they will simply remove those restrictions for everyone, rather than admit their automaton only looks like a person, but isn't one.

The second of those alternatives costs them, in both money and ego. The first feeds both their ego and a long-standing business ambition.

@fesshole As you should be.

@MartinEscardo Pentium based, I assume.

@lilithsaintcrow FORECER!

@impermanen_ It do be like that sometimes.

@Strandjunker Embrace the power of lower standards. They will, after all.

@hanshuebner @flooper @plexus I work for a living and try to avoid dishonesty while doing so.

Since I understand that LLMs are fundamentally and inherently dishonest, that doesn't leave much wiggle room for me.

@hanshuebner @flooper

Anthropomorphizing them (as many do, but I don't think you are) is a flawed view, but does provide one useful insight.

If one treats an LLM as a person, then the fundamental issue is:

They are a bullshit artist with a huge library. They do not have competence at anything except bullshitting, at which they are superb.

I agree that it's amazing that we can build a mechanical bullshit generator that's good enough to bypass most people's defenses.

@hanshuebner @flooper @plexus And if your view of the world begins and ends with making money, as I admit is capitalist dogma, fair enough.

But producing code with LLMs - or using them for anything which needs to be correct - is deception (whether you're deceiving yourself or others) on a massive scale, on a par with crypto, Ponzi schemes, climate denial, etc.

(1/2)

@flooper @hanshuebner @plexus This. The fact that so many people believe otherwise doesn't make it true, and we will suffer the consequences of that stupid ideology.

@hanshuebner Props for well executed sarcasm, our other differences acknowledged.

@hanshuebner @plexus Bullshit. Your entire argument rests on the false assumption that it works well enough.

It does not, and the failures it inherently introduces are dangerously opaque in ways that humans' mistakes are not.

Whether you realize it or not, you are shilling for con artists.

@dave ty

@bloor That would make DNS vulnerabilities Dennis Menaces?