What AI haters don’t get is that the people fanning the flames of AI(LLM’s) hate are the same people who want you to buy their subscriptions, because they know the only place the real damage occurs is in OpenSource communities.
AI use for Open Source projects is arguably the one use case that benefits everyone, plus it’s a sweet irony against corps and their locked-down proprietary software. Denouncer will loudly hawk that LLMs will make it trivial to circumvent the GPL, but they fail to mention that the pendulum swings both ways; with LLMs, it’s now easier than ever to reverse engineer proprietary systems and programs, recently there was a similar discourse on lemmy due to the mario kart wii decompilation.
They want loud people to sow division into OpenSource communities so that true opensource LLMs solutions are shunned and never reach maturity, corporate meanwhile is unaffected.
AI use for Open Source projects is arguably the one use case that benefits everyone,
It doesn’t benefit everyone if it pushes the quality down because the impetus to go fast wins over the dedication to reviewing the code properly.
Nor does it benefit everyone if the world becomes uninhabitable because of the energy used by data centers.
Nor does it benefit everyone if economies collapse due to the hype being wrong and the speculative bubble bursts.
Nor does it benefit everyone if the hype is right and it renders most jobs redundant.
These are the very rational things “haters” are concerned about. AI is for the rich to get richer. It does nothing for the rest of us.
It doesn’t benefit everyone if it pushes the quality down
Look I know some people will chime in and say things were better when programmers had to do their own memory management but I can’t say I agree. Good tools don’t push quality down. People using tools incorrectly certainly does and it’s a guarantee some people will use new tools incorrectly.
Having a tool that can chew through a lot of code and give you suggestions which can be verified is indisputably valuable. Is it worth all the datacenters? Hell no. But open source people aren’t driving that.
The problem is that most of the people that are using it are not using it correctly and are not using it in a manner that they are just simply trying to find something to correct it. They’re literally using it to write the code and they’re barely scanning it afterwards. Therefore it’s creating a mishmash spaghetti bullshit that nobody wants.
Do we think when the hammer was invented people only used it correctly? If 99 people out of 100 used it incorrectly would that make it a bad tool? I don’t think so. How people use it in general doesn’t have anything to do with the usefulness of the tool when used correctly.
What AI haters don’t get is that the people fanning the flames of AI(LLM’s) hate are the same people who want you to buy their subscriptions, because they know the only place the real damage occurs is in OpenSource communities.
AI use for Open Source projects is arguably the one use case that benefits everyone, plus it’s a sweet irony against corps and their locked-down proprietary software. Denouncer will loudly hawk that LLMs will make it trivial to circumvent the GPL, but they fail to mention that the pendulum swings both ways; with LLMs, it’s now easier than ever to reverse engineer proprietary systems and programs, recently there was a similar discourse on lemmy due to the mario kart wii decompilation.
They want loud people to sow division into OpenSource communities so that true opensource LLMs solutions are shunned and never reach maturity, corporate meanwhile is unaffected.
Finally someone talking sense.
It doesn’t benefit everyone if it pushes the quality down because the impetus to go fast wins over the dedication to reviewing the code properly. Nor does it benefit everyone if the world becomes uninhabitable because of the energy used by data centers. Nor does it benefit everyone if economies collapse due to the hype being wrong and the speculative bubble bursts. Nor does it benefit everyone if the hype is right and it renders most jobs redundant.
These are the very rational things “haters” are concerned about. AI is for the rich to get richer. It does nothing for the rest of us.
Look I know some people will chime in and say things were better when programmers had to do their own memory management but I can’t say I agree. Good tools don’t push quality down. People using tools incorrectly certainly does and it’s a guarantee some people will use new tools incorrectly.
Having a tool that can chew through a lot of code and give you suggestions which can be verified is indisputably valuable. Is it worth all the datacenters? Hell no. But open source people aren’t driving that.
The problem is that most of the people that are using it are not using it correctly and are not using it in a manner that they are just simply trying to find something to correct it. They’re literally using it to write the code and they’re barely scanning it afterwards. Therefore it’s creating a mishmash spaghetti bullshit that nobody wants.
Do we think when the hammer was invented people only used it correctly? If 99 people out of 100 used it incorrectly would that make it a bad tool? I don’t think so. How people use it in general doesn’t have anything to do with the usefulness of the tool when used correctly.