Most people do not read the article link that’s posted. So I put an AI summary of the link as a comment, but as a spoiler so if you don’t want to engage with it you don’t have to and also the full article so people can more accessibly read the article. Also as a spoiler so it doesn’t take up a full page of a comment. It got removed by a mod as AI slop.
I could use AI on a headline and you would never know the difference. I could just say it’s my own summary also probably wouldn’t know the difference. Punishing people for being transparent about using LLMs who are not forcing the reader to engage with them is a net positive and a good practice to teach. The opposite is people still use them and just pretend they aren’t.
“Just write your own summary” probably burns more fossil fuel than using deepseek, just because of how wasteful our food systems are. I think any work that’s not powered by a ham sandwich is better than average.
People here have decided they don’t like this tech first, and therefore have decided that the environmental cost of it is too high second. If you use it you’re burning the earth, you’re not a real leftist, there are no legitimate uses, etc. there’s zero room for discussion around it.
Let them have their space the way they want it. It doesn’t matter really. The goal posts will keep moving as this tech develops anyway.
Yeah i was thinking about this. It’s more about who is pushing it that makes them hate the tech. It’s the same people forcing bitcoin that are totally ass and so it’s just about creating a frame which to hate it. I was trying to have a discussion about it, but it’s obvious they don’t want to and that’s fine. I enjoy using it and what’s kinda funny is I’ve seen countless people on here also talk about what they like about the tech, so I know it’s not just a me thing, but like Reddit once you have a dissenting opinion to the hive mind it’s just pile on time especially when a few people agree with the mods and admins