Home | Notifications | New Note | Local | Federated | Search | Logout

Note Detail

Reply to @SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo
Blurry Moon@sun@shitposter.world (2026-10-03 03:45:52)
@SuperDicq @steph maybe your problem is capitalism not ai
---Reply---
SuperDicq@SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo (2026-10-03 03:58:19)
@sun@shitposter.world @steph@fedi.steph.tools I'm not that kind of leftie. I don't necessarily hate capitalism. I prefer a system of capitalism the incentives of making money actually align with what is good for people. And part is that means that we must not tolerate proprietary software.

I also don't LLMs as a technology. I think they can be useful tools. But all of them are as of now still proprietary and all of its output is legally dubious (so probably proprietary) which means it's better to avoid using them.

---Replies---

SuperDicq@SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo (2026-10-03 04:02:43)
@sun@shitposter.world @steph@fedi.steph.tools Right now (putting freedom issues aside running the software itself) I would say the only things you can get away with using LLMs for that certainly does not put you at risk of copyright violation is making them do tasks such as running tests, debugging, explaining or summarizing things, etc. Also definitely put them in a virtual machine without any access to the host.

You shouldn't let it produce works that you actually intend to publish. Not just for legal reasons but also because they are usually low quality slop.

Blurry Moon@sun@shitposter.world (2026-10-03 04:03:00)
@SuperDicq @steph I think this is all the result of the pressure of commerce, things were bad before llms

Sex Tips: Cunnilingus Tutorial📱@mischievoustomato@0.5dollah.click (2026-10-03 04:36:51)
@SuperDicq @steph @sun > And part is that means that we must not tolerate proprietary software.

but what if i like proprietary software and i also write some of it (but not necessarily the things i like)